On 4/12/24 3:36 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> Testing was clean on both LE and BE, so I pushed the changes.
> I'll let things bake on trunk for a bit before pushing the backports.
The backports all tested clean, so I pushed them. Fixed everywhere.
Thanks everyone!
Peter
On 4/11/24 11:23 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> I'll make the changes above, modulo leaving the option name unchanged until
> we hear from Segher on that and report back on the LE and BE testing.
I made all of the requested changes and went with -mpower8-internal since
Segher was fine with that
Hi!
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:23:02PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 4/11/24 10:31 PM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> >> +;; This option exists only to create its MASK. It is not intended for
> >> users.
> >> +mdo-not-use-this-option
> >> +Target RejectNegative Mask(POWER8) Var(rs6000_isa_flags)
On 4/11/24 10:31 PM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> The passed bootstrap and regtest on powerpc64le-linux. Ok for trunk?
>
> Thanks for fixing this. I guess it should go well on powerpc64-linux too,
> but since it's very late stage4 now, could you also test this on BE machine?
Will do, after making the
Hi,
on 2024/4/12 06:15, Peter Bergner wrote:
> FYI: This patch is an update to Will Schmidt's patches to fix PR101865:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-September/601825.html
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-September/601823.html
>
> ...taking into
