From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-295761-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 16474 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2011 12:51:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 16466 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2011 12:51:08 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-qw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:50:53 +0000
Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5so1840119qwh.20        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 05:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.63.69 with SMTP id a5mr2549063qci.94.1309524652951; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 05:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.214.83 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 05:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <yddaacyxtjd.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
References: <20110625161357.GA5401@intel.com>	<4E078E58.20903@redhat.com>	<BANLkTikToedVDqx9V+bB9xb+dL_r-6f31g@mail.gmail.com>	<4E07A879.70509@redhat.com>	<BANLkTik8ZOfWVUV7SV1ryQ=yJtUiCG+tqQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4E089A88.60401@redhat.com>	<BANLkTimw8O0UnnVATPKgrRCVT=82sO48Dw@mail.gmail.com>	<4E0C8361.5050403@redhat.com>	<BANLkTinOGKQCq2abZW0L7CLOQ901+Oodxg@mail.gmail.com>	<4E0C904E.8090504@redhat.com>	<BANLkTiknF6h_qJ9rAgBikdAM8O7RgSdyHA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimGtPskWYsGOi+hp59DKnDW7wD2sw@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimYZoGBBUxq+uMehqGxR5E1cpEavA@mail.gmail.com>	<yddvcvnxkm0.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>	<BANLkTikRuXz1RP1LxU8BCEFoT+pNP5e_Jw@mail.gmail.com>	<yddr56bxkb1.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>	<BANLkTimRWq4S4bKQpvuYzO3Go6yMc2fcgg@mail.gmail.com>	<4E0CC85E.3090401@redhat.com>	<BANLkTimt9V4kyKE2jmixeMOW=k7ghWrw+A@mail.gmail.com>	<yddaacyxtjd.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:51:00 -0000
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=1Y8wHj6Y_vMp5GJSp-C+yNVa5dw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: PATCH [8/n]: Prepare x32: PR other/48007: Unwind library doesn't work with UNITS_PER_WORD > sizeof (void *)
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Rainer Orth <ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, 	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Rainer Orth <ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> w=
rote:
> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Here is the updated patch. =A0It works on simple tests.
>> I am running full tests. =A0I kept config/i386/value-unwind.h
>> since libgcc/md-unwind-support.h is included too late
>> in unwind-dw2.c and I don't want to move it to be on
>> the safe side.
>
> Oh please, don't pile hack upon hack to avoid proper testing.
>

What is your suggestion?


--=20
H.J.