http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57389
--- Comment #3 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org --- humm, this fix is false. Forget about this patch.. rs6000_dbx_register_number should now handle this case.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57389
--- Comment #3 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org --- humm, this fix is false. Forget about this patch.. rs6000_dbx_register_number should now handle this case.