> Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 12:58:32 -0400
> From: George Koehler
>
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 21:08:52 +0200 (CEST)
> Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> > Upstream fixed this issue as well. Apparently only ADDE can't be
> > legalized (because it is "special") but ADDCARRY can. Do ypu want to
> > adjust your
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:58:32PM -0400, George Koehler wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 21:08:52 +0200 (CEST)
> Mark Kettenis wrote:
>
> > Upstream fixed this issue as well. Apparently only ADDE can't be
> > legalized (because it is "special") but ADDCARRY can. Do ypu want to
> > adjust your
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 21:08:52 +0200 (CEST)
Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Upstream fixed this issue as well. Apparently only ADDE can't be
> legalized (because it is "special") but ADDCARRY can. Do ypu want to
> adjust your diff based on that information?
>
> Either way, ok kettenis@
This adjusted
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 01:31:12 -0400
> From: George Koehler
>
> Moving from bugs@ to tech@,
> because some people might miss a clang diff on bugs@.
>
> This diff modifies LLVM's DAGCombiner to skip an optimization if it
> would make an illegal ISD::ADDE node. This fixes fatal errors from
>
Moving from bugs@ to tech@,
because some people might miss a clang diff on bugs@.
This diff modifies LLVM's DAGCombiner to skip an optimization if it
would make an illegal ISD::ADDE node. This fixes fatal errors from
powerpc clang when building ports net/libtorrent-rasterbar and
