From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15337 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2007 23:13:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 15325 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Dec 2007 23:13:44 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:13:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lB4NDakW016527; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:13:37 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lB4NDaCx024704; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:13:36 -0500 Received: from pantani.quesejoda.com (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lB4NDZjC019440; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 18:13:36 -0500 Received: by pantani.quesejoda.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 8980511A0347; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 19:13:35 -0400 (AST) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:13:00 -0000 From: Aldy Hernandez To: Hans-Peter Nilsson Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: PR33713: remove -fforce-addr Message-ID: <20071204231335.GA3822@redhat.com> References: <20071204151926.GA28920@redhat.com> <200712042253.lB4MrgZ9021439@ignucius.se.axis.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200712042253.lB4MrgZ9021439@ignucius.se.axis.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-12/txt/msg00136.txt.bz2 > > I only tested on x86-linux. > > Wot? First you said x86_64-linux! ;) You're reading what I write, not what I mean :). Yeah, x86_64-linux, as that's my primary workstation. > Anyway, the point of this communication: was it really a good > thing to remove all test-cases using -fforce-addr? Why not just > remove their -fforce-addr argument? Can we add them back? I don't have a problem with that. Steven?