On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 06:07:26PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 02:18:00PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:26AM -0600, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 02:18:00PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:26AM -0600, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in
> > function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark all of the
> >
On Fri, 2022-01-28 at 11:50 -0600, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new
> built-in
> function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark all of the
> "nosoft"
> built-ins, and one of those should also have been marked
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 02:18:00PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:26AM -0600, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in
> > function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:26AM -0600, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in
> function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark all of the "nosoft"
> built-ins, and one of those should also have been marked
PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in
function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark all of the "nosoft"
built-ins, and one of those should also have been marked "no32bit".
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu with no regressions.
Is this
