From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>
Received: from mengyan1223.wang (mengyan1223.wang [89.208.246.23])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33CC1385E007;
 Fri, 30 Jul 2021 18:08:31 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 33CC1385E007
Received: from [IPv6:240e:35a:10a1:4e00:dc73:854d:832e:2] (unknown
 [IPv6:240e:35a:10a1:4e00:dc73:854d:832e:2])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-384))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 (Authenticated sender: xry111@mengyan1223.wang)
 by mengyan1223.wang (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D0F265EEC;
 Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:08:22 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <9e5d7876de629b60a5404b2b33871a5d97b6d207.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
Subject: committed: [PATCH] mips: Fix up mips_atomic_assign_expand_fenv
 [PR94780]
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>
To: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
Cc: Matthew Fortune <mfortune@gmail.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Jakub
 Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:08:19 +0800
In-Reply-To: <8d76a84a712bbef5adc6d540d49f2728b98fed0a.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
References: <84b8b6a1019dd2a6eb84daf6cc21358d8781f5b7.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
 <41b4eb8970718ada95ecf6b6de9dd3a515db6cff.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
 <mpt5ywsi5l1.fsf@arm.com>
 <8d76a84a712bbef5adc6d540d49f2728b98fed0a.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.40.3 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3032.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, SPF_HELO_PASS,
 SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no 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 <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: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 18:08:34 -0000

On Fri, 2021-07-30 at 16:23 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-07-30 at 09:11 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang> writes:
> > > Ping again.
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2021-06-23 at 11:11 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > > > Commit message shamelessly copied from 1777beb6b129 by jakub:
> > > > 
> > > > This function, because it is sometimes called even outside of
> > > > function
> > > > bodies, uses create_tmp_var_raw rather than create_tmp_var.  But
> > > > in
> > > > order
> > > > for that to work, when first referenced, the VAR_DECLs need to
> > > > appear
> > > > in a
> > > > TARGET_EXPR so that during gimplification the var gets the right
> > > > DECL_CONTEXT and is added to local decls.
> > > > 
> > > > Bootstrapped & regtested on mips64el-linux-gnu.  Ok for trunk
> > > > and
> > > > backport
> > > > to 11, 10, and 9?
> > 
> > OK for all, thanks.
> > 
> > Similar comments to the previous message about the appropriateness
> > of me reviewing the patch, but like you say, this is doing for MIPS
> > what we've already had to do for other targets.
> 
> Thanks for reviewing.
> 
> Will bootstrap and test it again, and commit if there is no
> regressions.

Committed to master at 20656544 and releases/gcc-11 at 7db1795a.

Will do it for gcc-10 and gcc-9 tomorrow.