From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-14014-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 17681 invoked by alias); 18 Jan 2002 18:16:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 17664 invoked by uid 71); 18 Jan 2002 18:16:02 -0000
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 10:16:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20020118181602.17663.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
Subject: Re: target/491: [ARM 4l] unrecognizable insn 
Reply-To: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00665.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR target/491; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
To: pb@gcc.gnu.org, chris@cgnet.cx, pb@nexus.co.uk, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Subject: Re: target/491: [ARM 4l] unrecognizable insn 
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 18:11:59 +0000

 >     Bug confirmed to exist (indeed, positively notorious)
 
 I don't think this can occur in gcc-3.0 or later, since the way reload 
 handles these sort of problems has been radically altered.