This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, rs6000] power8 patch #1, infrastructure changes (revised patch)
- From: David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Pat Haugen <pthaugen at us dot ibm dot com>, Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 23:29:27 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000] power8 patch #1, infrastructure changes (revised patch)
- References: <20130520204053 dot GA21090 at ibm-tiger dot the-meissners dot org> <20130520204923 dot GA25144 at ibm-tiger dot the-meissners dot org> <20130520213408 dot GA30353 at ibm-tiger dot the-meissners dot org>
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Michael Meissner
<meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> After submitting the patch, I realized I had submitted a previous version of
> the patch, that had the wq constraint that was initially for the quad memory
> operations, and also had the changes for ChangeLog.ibm, that I keep on the
> branch. However, the wq constraint was always equal to the r constraint, do I
> have removed it, and used the 'r' constraint once again.
>
> I have also done bootstraps and make check with the patches submitted, with no
> regressions found. Can I check in the revised patch?
Patch #1 is okay.
Thanks, David