Hi Robin, Just revert this patch, it reports some weird illegal instr, I may need more time for this.
Pan -----Original Message----- From: Li, Pan2 Sent: Monday, July 3, 2023 11:00 PM To: Robin Dapp <rdapp....@gmail.com>; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> Cc: jeffreyalaw <jeffreya...@gmail.com>; Wang, Yanzhang <yanzhang.w...@intel.com>; kito.cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Fix one typo of FRM dynamic definition Sure, every change need test and will pay attention for this in future. Pan -----Original Message----- From: Robin Dapp <rdapp....@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 3, 2023 10:57 PM To: Li, Pan2 <pan2...@intel.com>; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> Cc: rdapp....@gmail.com; jeffreyalaw <jeffreya...@gmail.com>; Wang, Yanzhang <yanzhang.w...@intel.com>; kito.cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: Fix one typo of FRM dynamic definition > Sorry for inconvenient, still working on fix it. If urgent I can > revert this change to unblock your work ASAP. I'm not blocked by this, thanks, just wanted to document it here. I was testing another patch and needed to dig for a while until I realized the FAILs come from this one. In general I would assume that even obvious patches are tested before (I have introduced bugs by obvious ones before so I make sure to). Regards Robin
