This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, AArch64, testsuite] PR63971: Revert test_frame_* patch.
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
- To: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Tejas Belagod <tejas dot belagod at arm dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Marcus Shawcroft <Marcus dot Shawcroft at arm dot com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 00:53:46 -0800
- Subject: Re: [Patch, AArch64, testsuite] PR63971: Revert test_frame_* patch.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54B65817 dot 3070104 at arm dot com> <FDFF8CD8-A6EA-48F8-A1A8-097C4651D82E at comcast dot net>
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Tejas Belagod <tejas.belagod@arm.com> wrote:
>> As agreed here (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63971), please can I reverse Andrew's patch out(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02916.html)?
>
> Ok.
>
> Unless someone objects to a reversion like this, when the author of a patch says it should be revertedâ thatâs all the approval it needs, though, people can always ask for a review for any reason they want.
And now this reversal needs to be reverted. Because the conditional
compare optimization went back in. I figured the optimization would
go back in and that is why I did not act on reverting my patch that
fast. The conditional compare patch went in a day after this reversal
went in ;).
Thanks,
Andrew