-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/15/11 15:31, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > On 15/11/2011, at 6:21 AM, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>> >> Bootstrapped on s390x, x86_64 and PPC64. No regressions >> >> Ok for mainline? > > Good portion of the code you're changing was written by Richard K. > ages ago, so CC'ing him to get his approval. I'd ask the meta question, is there a compelling reason to push this patch into the tree now? My obvious concern is that this change potentially effects every target and twiddles one of GCC's most sensitive areas. Even if the patch is sound it's the kind of change that could easily have unforeseen consequences. If there isn't a compelling reason, then I think it should be queued for 4.8-stage1. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOw0/NAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7huoIAIBTy1fvXcdLSzC6jMekDHcS XTNpuKLRDYCV1p2sBLQwGvYG6uOoJvz9EwzgL3Wgo7PTe5TDavCS7wb6EbDg7bV5 RnDWjMEgsgjs9I7MNn9GesqBWuJFedC0e9Qw65bsMGlKn3ZK8z3tfWZfJLCmcIMp j2jUlZcfiYUGGBErPj5mqP6KsEIfl7B+I9EnEPJUc6A1Nvab0cXfKYi5hjRxkbtb OT5O5Y8KqQj5dGKcYOKk9HcG5IyPxlzY9jZWbsCgeXrU8vaX77Z8sTod3KMQ6LFe l3j0xAaJybmmxhnkXKhmZ7BjAEM6rkEspd0fRjD+OMDEYN7EkSdvHo34T2YmAGY= =IArX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
