On 05/14/2014 10:31 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 2014-05-14 09:37, Daniel Hellstrom wrote:
Hello Sebastian,
I think the patch is correct, however I would rather see that you use g4
instead of g2 to increment, that way you don't need the move either.
Ok, see follow up patch.
Ok, thanks.
On 2014-05-14 09:37, Daniel Hellstrom wrote:
Hello Sebastian,
I think the patch is correct, however I would rather see that you use g4
instead of g2 to increment, that way you don't need the move either.
Ok, see follow up patch.
Looking in the area of the code that you patch, it seems as if
Hello Sebastian,
I think the patch is correct, however I would rather see that you use g4
instead of g2 to increment, that way you don't need the move either.
Looking in the area of the code that you patch, it seems as if this code hasn't been run. I have a TODO since long to go over this code,
