On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 16:03 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 21:05 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > I guess the most important question is what guarantees there are that it > > won't affect non-powerpc* ports too much (my main concern is the 9/26 patch, > > plus the C++ FE / libstdc++ changes), and how much does this affect > > code generation and overall stability of the PowerPC big endian existing > > targets. > > * 15/26 might be one we can do without. I need to check with Peter > Bergner, who originally backported Fabien's patch, but unfortunately he > is on vacation. That patch fixed a problem that originated on an x86 > platform. I can try respinning the patch series without this one and > see what breaks, or if Peter happens to see this while he's on vacation, > perhaps he can comment.
This was a fix to bring GCC into agreement with XLC++ and clang wrt the test case in PR54537. The XL team also had complained separately that they couldn't compile programs that included the header file tr1/cmath because it contained that bug. That said, this "fix" is not required for POWER8 or LE support, so if the RMs don't want this backported to the FSF 4.8 tree, I'm ok with that. That being said, we will ask the 4.8 based distros to pick up this patch since it fixes a bug that XL cannot workaround. Peter
