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: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.

From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
Cc: Toon Moene <moene at knmi dot nl>, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot org>, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:34:53 +0100
Subject: Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
References: <49B832FA.9050606@moene.org> <571f6b510903111532x60213af8k9573da2cc842725e@mail.gmail.com> <49B8428F.3030500@moene.org> <6dc9ffc80903111608s2da8a5f1iccaf6b69d4018304@mail.gmail.com> <49B84746.3050102@moene.org> <49B8CA6F.1080905@gnu.org> <49B8CC6E.2050903@knmi.nl> <49B8E43C.4080600@gnu.org> <49B905C4.70400@knmi.nl> <49B91619.8090804@gnu.org> <6dc9ffc80903120706s7bc25f19vf803443c01f7dfb5@mail.gmail.com>

> Will "REGNO (operands[0]) == REGNO (operands[1])" work here?

Yes.  I wanted to be conservative in case one day subregs or who knows
what are allowed.  I'll defer to maintainers or other people (Steven?),
either way is fine by me.

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Steven Bosscher

References:
- Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Toon Moene
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Toon Moene
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Toon Moene
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Toon Moene
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Toon Moene
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: Revision 144098 (d.d. Wed Feb 11 08:56:41 2009 UTC (4 weeks ago)) is not a regression bug fix.
  - From: H.J. Lu

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