From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15D6C3959E49
 for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 28 Jun 2021 10:23:46 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 15D6C3959E49
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none)
 header.from=kernel.crashing.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org
Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 15SAMjZB025294;
 Mon, 28 Jun 2021 05:22:45 -0500
Received: (from segher@localhost)
 by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 15SAMiqk025293;
 Mon, 28 Jun 2021 05:22:44 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to
 segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 05:22:44 -0500
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>, 
 Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.ibm.com>,
 will schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com>, cel@us.ibm.com,
 Michael Meissner <meissner@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: rs6000: Fix typos in float128 ISA3.1 support
Message-ID: <20210628102244.GB668@gate.crashing.org>
References: <32c02216-9f50-8b1b-9d5d-43a769c3c149@linux.ibm.com>
 <20210622185602.GD5077@gate.crashing.org>
 <2fc5b902-9c0b-89b2-c526-ce6a6f638757@linux.ibm.com>
 <20210623165850.GG5077@gate.crashing.org>
 <675c530f-13dc-df82-cfd1-dd4b07e4a546@linux.ibm.com>
 <20210624193653.GK5077@gate.crashing.org>
 <766cae11-b4f1-b705-587d-e2d35d91cde4@linux.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <766cae11-b4f1-b705-587d-e2d35d91cde4@linux.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS, TXREP, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR,
 T_SPF_PERMERROR autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) 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: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 10:23:47 -0000

On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 04:15:15PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> on 2021/6/25 上午3:36, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > mode(__TI__) is just the more portable way of writing mode(TI), the
> > latter will not work if something #define's TI (you cannot do that with
> > __TI__, you are not allowed to by the C standard, in application code).
> 
> Yeah, thanks for the note.  It looks better to update the generic
> macro with this ppc style "__" writting and remove ppc one. :-)
> 
> One related bug PR101235 was just opened, I noticed the culprit commit
> was backported to GCC11, is it OK to backport this fix to GCC 11 if
> everything goes well in one more week?

Please backport this immediately.  Thanks!


Segher