From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18208 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2004 07:37:42 -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 18183 invoked by uid 48); 14 Aug 2004 07:37:39 -0000 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:37:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040814073739.18181.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040709031204.16446.billingd@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20040709031204.16446.billingd@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/16446] Irix calling conventions for complex numbers X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg01348.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-08-14 07:37 ------- Hi David, Just wondering: where do we stand on this? Do you think the patch is good to go, or is there some more testing you'd like to do? If there is, that's fine, I can hold off until you've finished. FWIW, I've been testing the patch locally with a minor correction: replacing the "==" in "== MAX_ARGS_IN_REGISTERS - 1" with ">=". The patch doesn't seem to introduce any new failures for me: the one I mentioned earlier seems to have been a glitch. Richard -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16446