From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECB303858C3A for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:45 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org ECB303858C3A Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 22FJOU2g028871; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:44 GMT Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3eu0xa8cqg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:44 +0000 Received: from m0098396.ppops.net (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 22FJiDoH010513; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:43 GMT Received: from ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (7a.29.35a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.53.41.122]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3eu0xa8cq7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:43 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 22FJjI5p001102; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:42 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.23]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3erk59nusq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:42 +0000 Received: from b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.107]) by b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 22FJnfbl30671152 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:41 GMT Received: from b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50384124054; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C70124052; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.77.152.28] (unknown [9.77.152.28]) by b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:40 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <8c003ae0-8bf7-62f1-2760-0340e05502df@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 14:49:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Allow using -mlong-double-64 after -mabi={ibm,ieee}longdouble [PR104208, PR87496] Content-Language: en-US From: Peter Bergner To: David Edelsohn , Segher Boessenkool Cc: Jakub Jelinek , Florian Weimer , GCC Patches References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: muuoyKlhNR9gkaDktieDG2bl9DQpkG6n X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: STyCw9NFBtUH0VcQPPWFEIcX2BkfRrx3 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.850,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.64.514 definitions=2022-03-15_10,2022-03-15_01,2022-02-23_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2202240000 definitions=main-2203150113 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:49:48 -0000 On 3/4/22 8:14 PM, Peter Bergner wrote: > On 3/4/22 11:33 AM, Peter Bergner wrote: >>> Ok pushed to trunk.  I haven't determined yet whether we need this on GCC 11 yet. >>> I'll check on that and report back.  Thanks! >> >> I've confirmed that GCC 11 fails the same way and that the backported patch >> fixes the issue there too.  Ok for GCC 11 assuming my full regression testing >> is clean? >> >> GCC 10 has the same checking code, so it looks to need the backport as well. >> I'll go ahead and backport and regression test it there too. > > The backports to GCC 11 and GCC 10 bootstrapped and regtested with no regressions. > Ok for the GCC 11 and GCC 10 release branches after a day or two of baking on > trunk? Ping. The trunk patch has been confirmed to fix the glibc build errors and no issues with the patch has surfaced, so ok for the GCC11 and GCC10 release branches? Peter