From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8491 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2002 18:27:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8380 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2002 18:27:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.31.123) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Feb 2002 18:27:46 -0000 Received: (from hubicka@localhost) by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id TAA23360; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:27:42 +0100 Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 10:52:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Richard Henderson , Jan Hubicka , law@redhat.com, John David Anglin , gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: ICE in 920624-1.c with -O3 -funroll-loops on vax-dec-ultrix4.3 Message-ID: <20020205182742.GD30128@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20020204164731.A19099@redhat.com> <13368.1012879798@porcupine.cygnus.com> <20020204215518.A19374@redhat.com> <20020205124050.GR17128@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20020205092437.A19915@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020205092437.A19915@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00413.txt.bz2 > On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 01:40:50PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Perhaps using symbol_ref is just fine. For calls we also do use > > symbol refs to addresses inside code segment. > > And on thouse troublesome ports we have ENCODE_SECTION_INFO > to set e.g. SYMBOL_REF_FLAG to indicate a code segment address. > >From whence would you call ENCODE_SECTION_INFO from this? > > Of course, don't get me started on how SYMBOL_REF should be > cleaned up as well. Perhaps instead of generating many *_REF beasts, we should use one with flags specifying the segment _REF is in. We partly do that for SYMBOL_REF and static storage anyway. But this is another involved topic :( Honza > > > r~