On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > As originally discussed here: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-05/msg00987.html > > Changes since the original submission: > > Per Richi's suggestion I changed the patch to use a GC'd VEC. I defined > accessor macros so that a ton of reformatting isn't needed and finally I > made the appropriate tweaks to the few backends that peeked at the > reg_equiv arrays. > > Given the changes and the length of time since the original submission, > I think it's probably best to get a fresh approval rather than rely on > the prior approval.
Looks good to me. Thanks, Richard. > Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNkzznAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7VgYH/0yTkwWkDRyalReMk3whdIXO > 8qw5H6c9Gz+Yj+EnnPySKsFIvJKMBTQHIpdCzjTCVWD/Z7LSJwERzzlNCPrQu2au > dpOoUYCTAwgSW0Us9B+2Bcf2DABinYLV+hgKAKFEVi98CheZe3hZZ14lm5mlYDec > INYKyfqYHmyahT8fa6ABY2kp0X2xhQhJ0VAGPI34kytJpgLpIdtRwq6PsdsPM0PJ > frLAY5xIEmJqBB30RaPqnD07u06xZHi+S9gfAJa4LJTUqVALNusYdZzZajKMtF3i > BCXK4UFk+J2MlM9xZkVWqQiryLc6arVT2bMQcvz7tXTMZkY6ZdZ7sKFBgKea6vM= > =iMqQ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >