https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23013
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23013
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
Target Milestone|---
||https://sourceware.org/ml/b
||inutils/2018-03/msg00395.ht
||ml
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |bergner at vnet dot
ibm.com
--- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23013
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
,
||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22085
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
--
You
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20785
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tuliom at linux dot
vnet.ibm.com
---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20785
--- Comment #1 from Peter Bergner ---
The line with the problem is:
cmpli cr1,rLEN,128
Thi sis due to Alan's patch:
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2016-09/msg00217.html
I believe that this cmpli should be changed to cmpldi like t
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20641
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
FYI, I just committed a fix to the gdb testsuite to account for these changes.
* gdb.arch/powerpc-power.exp : Update tests to account for
the compulsory L operand changes.
* gdb.ar
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20641
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #2)
> {"tbegin.", {HTM_R}},
> {"tsr.",{L}},
>
> I'm inclined to say L should be optional when generating ppc32 code, for
> cmp* and tlbie. Not optional everywhe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20641
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
--
You
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20196
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
And fixed on the 2.26 release branch too.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutil
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20196
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
Fixed. I'll commit this to the 2.26 branch soon too.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20196
--- Comment #1 from Peter Bergner ---
I have a fix.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19421
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
--
You
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19359
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #6)
> Peter, I haven't investigated why gcc is misbehaving and I'm supposed to be
> on vacation. It is almost certainly an error in rs6000.h:ASM_CPU_SPEC.
Yes, it was
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19359
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #6)
> Fixed mainline. As far as I can see, this isn't a binutils regression.
>
> gcc bug opened here:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68872
>
> Peter,
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19359
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18414
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
--
You
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14758
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at vnet dot ibm.com
21 matches
Mail list logo
