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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
Cc: fnf at intrinsity dot com, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 22:36:06 -0700
Subject: Re: Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info
References: <200306040045.h540jPdB009467@fred.ninemoons.com> <20030604041327.GK19452@redhat.com> <1054700705.3882.180.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>

On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 12:25:05AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Wait, that doesn't follow.  You can have different alias set numbers
> that are conflicting.

Oh, yes, so you can.

I still bet his source is wrong.


r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info
  - From: Fred Fish
- Re: Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info
  - From: Toon Moene

References:
- Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info
  - From: Fred Fish
- Re: Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Question about mem_set_list in propagate_block_info
  - From: Diego Novillo

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