From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23890 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2004 10:14:56 -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 23880 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 10:14:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2004 10:14:56 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i69ABISt029192; Fri, 9 Jul 2004 06:11:18 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i69AEsw26353; Fri, 9 Jul 2004 06:14:55 -0400 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.27]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i69AEsP09943; Fri, 9 Jul 2004 03:14:54 -0700 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i69AEsQw008060; Fri, 9 Jul 2004 03:14:54 -0700 Received: (from rth@localhost) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i69AEsEM008058; Fri, 9 Jul 2004 03:14:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 10:55:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Paolo Bonzini , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove the postincrement queue Message-ID: <20040709101454.GA8047@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Paolo Bonzini , Paolo Bonzini , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <20040708195110.GC20150@redhat.com> <40EE4596.1090008@polimi.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40EE4596.1090008@polimi.it> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00930.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 09:13:26AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Would you preapprove the other bits for when the gimple_va_arg > conversion is done? I'd like to see if we can get rid of the rest of the expand_increment calls. r~