On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Andrew MacLeod <amacl...@redhat.com> wrote: > When investigating an issue on arm, I discovered a bug that needs fixing. > > If there is no atomic_load pattern for data which is larger than the native > word size, we try to issue a compare_and_swap loop. Problem is there is no > check to see if it succeeded or failed. If the compare-swap loop isn't > emitted, we need to leave the __atomic_load_N call rather than silently > generate incorrect code. > > Attached patch bootstraps on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and fixes the > problem on an arm cross compiler. > > No new regressions in the testsuite, and is a harmless change for working > code. > > OK to check in? GCC 4.7 is still mainline isn't it?
Ok and yes. Thanks, Richard. > Andrew > >
