Hi, Jeff,

Thanks a lot for your review and comments.

I have updated my patch based on your suggestion, and retested this whole patch on both X86 and aarch64.

please take a look at the patch again.

thanks.

Qing

> On May 25, 2018, at 3:38 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:

> So I originally thought you had the core logic wrong in the immediate
> uses loop.  But it's actually the case that the return value is the
> exact opposite of what I expected.
> 
> ie, I expected "TRUE" to mean the call was transformed, "FALSE" if it
> was not transformed.
> 
> Can you fix that so it's not so confusing?
> 
> I think with that change we'll be good to go, but please repost for a
> final looksie.
> 
> THanks,
> Jeff