On 5/5/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 5, 2006, at 7:26 AM, François-Xavier Coudert wrote: >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27437 > > Humpf. Does that mean that the patch wasn't regtested before being > applied? No, it was regression tested, just not on x86-linux-gnu like most people is doing.
I'm surprised, then, that on whatever target it was tested it passed because of the NEXT_INSN/PREV_INSN bug that HJ mentions in the PR. IMHO the patch should be reverted until it is fixed and tested properly... Gr. Steven
