On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 06:13:07PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: > These two above paragraphs look a bit out of date (two patches now). :)
Thanks. > IIUC this patch actually fixes a latent issue, so it is independent of the one > fixing the bootstrapping issue, right? This updated version of patch looks > good to me, but I'd leave the approval to Segher/David. Thanks! Yes, I've been waiting for Segher or David's approval for this for awhile. The history is it is indeed a latent issue (not supporting __ibm128 complex multiply and divide when long double is IEEE 128-bit). However, at the time I wrote it, the other changes had broken the complex multiply and divide, and I wrote this patch as part of the series. I separated the patch from the other 2 to make it simpler to go in. But it seems to be in limbo. -- Michael Meissner, IBM PO Box 98, Ayer, Massachusetts, USA, 01432 email: meiss...@linux.ibm.com
