On 8 July 2014 13:31, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Many people are using different patch levels interchangeably and expect
> them to be compatible. If X1 vectors are relatively rare, the better,
> fewer people will be affected when switching from 4.9.x to 4.10.x.
>
> But IMHO changing ABI between patc
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:08:27PM +0100, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> >> float64_t, as per ACLE - the error mentioned in the "Caveats" section at
> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/changes.html.
>
> ... along with a statement that this would be fixed
>
> Clearly the ABI change between 4.9.0 and 4
On 8 July 2014 12:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 12:28:54PM +0100, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>> This corrects name-mangling of float64x1_t and makes it a distinct type from
>> float64_t, as per ACLE - the error mentioned in the "Caveats" section at
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/cha
On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 12:28:54PM +0100, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> This corrects name-mangling of float64x1_t and makes it a distinct type from
> float64_t, as per ACLE - the error mentioned in the "Caveats" section at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/changes.html.
>
> (Only) Changes from the original
This corrects name-mangling of float64x1_t and makes it a distinct type from
float64_t, as per ACLE - the error mentioned in the "Caveats" section at
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/changes.html.
(Only) Changes from the original patch are to remove references to
__builtin_aarch64_im_lane_boundsi a
