> OK. Fixed the patch. Rebased and tested on x86_64-linux (fortunately, it > did not conflict with Trevor's series of rtx_insn-related patches).
good :) fwiw I have another series that'll probably be ready about the end of the week (the punishment for writing small patches is making the testing box spin for days ;-) > I'm trying to continue and the next patch (peep_split.patch, > peep_split.cl) is addressing the same task in some of the generated code > (namely, gen_peephole2_* and gen_split_* series of functions). ok, I've stayed away from the generators andjust done more "trivial" changes of rtx -> rtx_insn * in arguments. Trev > > If you're going to continue this work, you should probably get > > write-after-approval access so that you can commit your own approved > > changes. > Is it OK to mention you as a maintainer who can approve my request for > write access? > > -- > Regards, > Mikhail Maltsev >
