On 12/17/2013 7:52 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 17 December 2013 13:42, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >> Softfloat really isn't my area of expertise and I'd prefer to see these >> patches go in through a different tree :). Peter, do you want to take >> care of this patch and "Add float32_to_uint64()"? Or at least give >> me your reviewed-by tag and I'll send it through my tree since the >> second one is a build dependency for VSX patches. >> >> I've also seen comments on folding in bugfixes for patches that >> occurred earlier. I presume this is one of these cases. Mind to >> shed some light on this? > > Yeah, these are on my to-review list (we need the fixes for aarch64 > too :-)) but I'm waiting for Tom to post an updated patchset which > has the complete set of softfloat fixes rather than having one > patchset with a first version and a different patchset with a patch > which fixes bugs in the first one... > > thanks > -- PMM >
So it would seem to make the most sense to go back and do what I had done originally -- separate the softfloat fixes into their own patch set and make the VSX and P7 patches dependent on those. Agree?
