On 2012-06-11 18:40, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Richard Henderson <r...@twiddle.net> wrote: > >> Nope. I do see the obvious mistake in the atomic_load pattern though: >> The mode iterator should have been INT1 not INT. > > Did you want to commit the fix for the iterator?
Yes. I'm just finishing testing that patch in fact. > I like your suggestion, but the PowerPC developer community does not > uniformly appreciate that behavior. Surely there's a difference between gratuitously using fp registers and that being the *only* way to implement a particular operation... r~
