On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote: > Steven and Richard, > > I saw the email about the s390 switch statement > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg01026.html > > and tested this patch on MIPS to see if using NEXT_INSN instead of > next_real_insn fixed PR 56942. It did, so is this the right long > term fix for MIPS?
Yes it is. Also for other targets that look for JUMP_TABLE_DATA via next_*_insn. Sorry for not getting the necessary changes in any quicker. I'll try to get things cleaned up a bit next weekend. Ciao! Steven
