"Andre Vieira (lists)" writes:
> Here is the latest version of the patch, I wasn't sure whether Richard's
> 'LGTM with...' was meant as a conditional OK and together with the
> changes suggested by Andrew I thought I'd ask again, OK for trunk?
>
>
> As per the AArch64 ISA FEAT_SME does not requi
Here is the latest version of the patch, I wasn't sure whether Richard's
'LGTM with...' was meant as a conditional OK and together with the
changes suggested by Andrew I thought I'd ask again, OK for trunk?
As per the AArch64 ISA FEAT_SME does not require FEAT_SVE2. However, we
don't support
Thanks for the suggestions.
On 14/03/2025 21:43, Andrew Carlotti wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 05:10:07PM +, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
Apologies for the delay, had been waiting on some other relevant patches to
go in to make sure we didn't break any valid existing behaviours. It should
a
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 05:10:07PM +, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Apologies for the delay, had been waiting on some other relevant patches to
> go in to make sure we didn't break any valid existing behaviours. It should
> all be working properly now. I think I've also addressed all your comme
On 14/03/2025 09:59, Richard Sandiford wrote:
"Andre Vieira (lists)" writes:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/no-sve-with-sme-3.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/no-sve-with-sme-3.c
new file mode 100644
index
..7a873fa2396a4129225ba
"Andre Vieira (lists)" writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> index
> 4fbb4cda101ebd14891a3ad80aa5b1bc069b45c6..3754e468a05b3ae554b71adb4cf60068d5249507
> 100644
> --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> @@ -22068,7 +22068,8 @@ Enable the Pointer Authe
"Andre Vieira (lists)" writes:
> Apologies for the delay, had been waiting on some other relevant patches
> to go in to make sure we didn't break any valid existing behaviours. It
> should all be working properly now. I think I've also addressed all your
> comments. Most notable change is that
Apologies for the delay, had been waiting on some other relevant patches
to go in to make sure we didn't break any valid existing behaviours. It
should all be working properly now. I think I've also addressed all your
comments. Most notable change is that it now uses the 'sorry' mechanism.
Bo
