From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20595 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2012 15:13:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 20582 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Aug 2012 15:13:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 15:13:15 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1Swabq-0006MR-Nz from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 08:13:14 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 1 Aug 2012 08:13:14 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:13:12 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Swabn-0003Uw-9y; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 15:13:11 +0000 Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 15:13:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Steve Ellcey CC: Subject: Re: Patch for MIPS PREF/PREFX macro definitions In-Reply-To: <8ac30d67-bdbe-4e7b-8b32-5a951f425bf5@EXCHHUB01.MIPS.com> Message-ID: References: <8ac30d67-bdbe-4e7b-8b32-5a951f425bf5@EXCHHUB01.MIPS.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-08/txt/msg00000.txt.bz2 On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, Steve Ellcey wrote: > I was wondering if someone could check in this obvious fix for MIPS. > The code is supposed to define the PREF and PREFX macro calls as nothing > when on a machine that doesn't support prefetching but the empty > definitions don't include the argument lists and that causes the > arguments to show up in the code which is wrong. Thanks, I've applied this patch (with the ChangeLog entry adjusted). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com