On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:43:05PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> Ah, you are correct. I misread the code, thinking it was returning a string,
> and not a pointer to the string in memory.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg00640.html
Patch reverted.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Developme
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 01:34:59AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:25:36PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > I committed the following patch as obvious, after making sure it builds and
> > has
> > no regressions. I was looking at driver-rs6000.c today, and I noticed that
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:25:36PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> I committed the following patch as obvious, after making sure it builds and
> has
> no regressions. I was looking at driver-rs6000.c today, and I noticed that it
> was returning an address to an auto buffer for processing -mcpu=n
I committed the following patch as obvious, after making sure it builds and has
no regressions. I was looking at driver-rs6000.c today, and I noticed that it
was returning an address to an auto buffer for processing -mcpu=native.
2013-06-11 Michael Meissner
PR target/57589
* c
