On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 05:07:26PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 2/13/18 4:34 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >> This patch passed bootstrap and retesting on powerpc64le-linux with
> >> no regressions.  Ok for mainline?
> > 
> > Okay, thanks!  Does this need backports?
> Committed with your suggested change below.  Thanks!
> It'd be easy to backport and should be fairly harmless.  That said, I was
> never able to create a simpler test case, using __builtin_altivec_lvx()
> that would end up being re-recog'd as vsx_movv4si_64, so the only way I
> know we can hit this is with Kelvin's optimization that replaces aligned
> vsx loads/stores with altivec loads/stores and that optimization is only
> on trunk.
> It's up to you whether you want the backport because you don't trust
> me being able to create a failing test case. :-)

We can backport without having a failing testcase.  Let's do that for 7
at least?


Reply via email to