From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xry111@xry111.site>
Received: from xry111.site (xry111.site [IPv6:2001:470:683e::1])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95D303857B99
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun,  3 Jul 2022 03:06:34 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 95D303857B99
Received: from localhost.localdomain (xry111.site [IPv6:2001:470:683e::1])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest
 SHA384) (Client did not present a certificate)
 (Authenticated sender: xry111@xry111.site)
 by xry111.site (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15F3C66850;
 Sat,  2 Jul 2022 23:06:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <047d4b06093d085c2fdb96e618469d3630e953dc.camel@xry111.site>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loongarch: use -mno-check-zero-division as the default
 for optimized code
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
To: Lulu Cheng <chenglulu@loongson.cn>
Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, GCC Patches
 <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Chenghua Xu <xuchenghua@loongson.cn>, Weining Lu
 <luweining@loongson.cn>, Wang Xuerui <i@xen0n.name>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 11:06:28 +0800
In-Reply-To: <e6737e48-ffed-5d41-fc89-835726c33387@loongson.cn>
References: <cffdc896d5243ba72e33c842ec0af93b10a70726.camel@xry111.site>
 <CAFiYyc2CEAwPfk0=0f4c+f380qiPuHy+DOeqh1zCtVh1Lp4ZoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <03929777-80a0-dcc1-3e04-9811583eebd3@loongson.cn>
 <311645282e42983004bb8f39e53ea4211e066285.camel@xry111.site>
 <e6737e48-ffed-5d41-fc89-835726c33387@loongson.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD,
 LIKELY_SPAM_FROM, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD,
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-patches>,
 <mailto:gcc-patches-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 03:06:36 -0000

On Sat, 2022-07-02 at 16:35 +0800, Lulu Cheng wrote:
> =E5=9C=A8 2022/7/2 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=884:24, Xi Ruoyao =E5=86=99=E9=81=93:
> >=20
> > I'll commit the patch with the hook removed after another regtest on
> > loongarch64-linux-gnu.=C2=A0 I just rebuilt the entire system on my
> > 3A5000,
> > so I need some time to set it up.=C2=A0 Expectation time to commit is
> > today
> > evening or tomorrow morning.
> >=20
> > BTW I've included this patch building my system, no bad things has
> > happened so far.
> Ok,Thanks!:-)

Pushed as r13-1410.

How do you think about the suggestion from Richard about a backport into
gcc-12 branch?  Normally we don't backport behavior changes, but making
12.1 the only exception seems compelling.