This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: PR2912

To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Subject: Re: PR2912
From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:39:26 -0700
Cc: weinberg at cygnus dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010524212258G.mitchell@codesourcery.com> <20010525104617.A8186@redhat.com> <20010525110752W.mitchell@codesourcery.com>

On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:07:52AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> OK, I see what you're saying -- you're saying that it's bogus to
> remove the set of `%al' because we don't know how else `%al' might be
> used after this point.  That makes sense.

Exactly.

> Would you mind removing my patch (which I guess perpetuates the bug in
> the original peephole, but makes it not crash us) with yours?

Done.


r~

References:
- PR2912
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: PR2912
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: PR2912
  - From: Mark Mitchell

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]