From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B5D63858C50 for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 15:53:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 7B5D63858C50 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass 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 319FqE8h013083; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 09:52:14 -0600 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 319FqEjG013082; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 09:52:14 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 09:52:14 -0600 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Xionghu Luo Cc: "Kewen.Lin" , Xionghu Luo , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn , Jakub Jelinek Subject: Re: Ping: [PATCH v4] rs6000: Fix incorrect RTL for Power LE when removing the UNSPECS [PR106069] Message-ID: <20230209155213.GB25951@gate.crashing.org> References: <20220808034247.2618809-1-xionghuluo@tencent.com> <76035a5e-f0d8-8bc5-93e9-cfb08b2127f8@gmail.com> <20220810170700.GA25951@gate.crashing.org> <472c1531-aae6-123e-6b0c-8827f5585879@gmail.com> <5df1a7fc-dacf-72e2-041d-66624926091f@linux.ibm.com> <37b57a54-f98e-96a3-edff-866c8aae4c7d@gmail.com> <5418ebd2-d544-f4cc-d930-bdde64ad2807@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 10:15:22AM +0800, Xionghu Luo wrote: > Thanks Kewen! > Ping this again @Segher. > Maybe we could also merge this patch if no objections from Segher as > several reviews and tests taken on this already... Please send the patch as the head of its own thread, not as a reply deep in a thread of an older version? Segher