https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30308
--- Comment #14 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse dot com> --- I've sent a v2 of my patch, without intending to mean that that's what is to be used. I'm fine using yours, but then I deem questionable the logic there altogether. There must be a better (less convoluted / involved) way to deal with those (and really any) uses of equates. Just that for now I can't really see how that could look like. There's a minor anomaly with your patch, possibly related to the NULL returning that I already commented upon: In the listing, the questionable insn doesn't have any code associated with it, yet there's also no error reported for that line. (The errors which are reported occur only later, after all input was processed.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
