On 14 December 2015 at 11:01, James Greenhalgh <james.greenha...@arm.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 09, 2015 at 01:13:20PM +0000, Marcus Shawcroft wrote: >> On 27 November 2015 at 13:01, James Greenhalgh <james.greenha...@arm.com> >> wrote: >> >> > 2015-11-27 James Greenhalgh <james.greenha...@arm.com> >> > >> > * config/aarch64/aarch64-protos.h >> > (aarch64_cannot_change_mode_class): Bring back. >> > * config/aarch64/aarch64.c >> > (aarch64_cannot_change_mode_class): Likewise. >> > * config/aarch64/aarch64.h (CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS): Likewise. >> > * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (aarch64_movdi_<mode>low): Use >> > zero_extract rather than truncate. >> > (aarch64_movdi_<mode>high): Likewise. >> > >> > 2015-11-27 James Greenhalgh <james.greenha...@arm.com> >> > >> > * gcc.dg/torture/pr67609.c: New. >> > >> >> + detailed dicussion. In all other cases, we want to be premissive >> >> s/premissive/permissive/ >> >> OK /Marcus > > Thanks. > > This has had a week or so to soak on trunk now, is it OK to backport to GCC > 5 and 4.9? > > The patch applies as-good-as clean, with only a little bit to fix up in > aarch64-protos.h to keep alphabetical order, and I've bootstrapped and tested > the backports with no issue.
OK /Marcus
