On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:14 AM, malc <av1...@comtv.ru> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Blue Swirl wrote: > >> Use TCG_REG_CALL_STACK instead of TCG_REG_R1 etc. for consistency. > > You spell it TCG_REG_CALL_STACK in the subject/comment but > REG_CALL_STACK in the patch, which suggest that it was never > even compile tested.
Actually I seem to have used both versions. I didn't compile test, but to make matters even worse, I didn't even read any reference manuals or ABI descriptions for any of these patches but based all this on bits gathered from */tcg-target.[ch]. But is the patch otherwise OK? ;-)
