On 07/05/11 21:25, Richard Sandiford wrote: > (Could you bootstrap this on x86_64 to check for things like that?
That has no loop_end pattern so it wouldn't be much of a test, but a x86_64 x bfin compiler has no warnings in this file with the intptr_t thing fixed. > A C bootstrap only should be fine of course, since the code isn't > going to be run.) > >> + hwloop_info loops = NULL; > > Unnecessary initialisation (or at least, it should be). ? The value is used inside the loop to initialize "next" of the first loop. Committed with these changes (except the last). Bernd
