From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5606 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2004 20:55:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5598 invoked by uid 48); 6 Jul 2004 20:55:12 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 20:55:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040706205512.5596.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "davem at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030430161600.10567.davem@redhat.com> References: <20030430161600.10567.davem@redhat.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/10567] -fno-delayed-branch not honored in back-end X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00514.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From davem at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-07-06 20:55 ------- It may not be pretty, but I believe it solves the bug correctly. I think it is worth applying. If we come up with a more clever way to do this stuff, then we'll do so. Meanwhile the bug will be fixed, there will be no regressions, and the ugliness will be confined to the sparc backend. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10567