Ok for google branches when tests are done. Update ChangeLog file properly.
David On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Harshit Chopra <hars...@google.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:10 PM, <davi...@google.com> wrote: >> >> Ok, Cary's explanation makes sense. Please update the comments to make >> it clearer. >> >> >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5416043/diff/1/gcc/config/i386/i386.c >> File gcc/config/i386/i386.c (right): >> >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5416043/diff/1/gcc/config/i386/i386.c#newcode10927 >> gcc/config/i386/i386.c:10927: + is later renamed to '<section_name>' >> by ix86_elf_asm_named_section(). */ >> Probably better to change the comment to something like -- we emit a >> unique section name for the back pointer section. This is needed because >> otherwise the 'get_section' call may return an existing non-comdat >> section with the same name, leading to references from non-comdat >> section to comdat functions. > > > Updated comment as suggested. > >> >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5416043/ > >
