Whilst I agree with Richard H that it is obvious, my feeling is that the
assertion does no harm, so have committed rev 210005 with Richard E's changes.
--Alan
Richard Henderson wrote:
On 04/29/2014 05:42 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 23/04/14 16:20, Alan Lawrence wrote:
This patch is a small
On 04/29/2014 05:42 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 23/04/14 16:20, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>> This patch is a small tidy of a more-complicated expression that just flips
>> a
>> single bit and can thus be a simple XOR.
>>
>> No regressions on aarch64-none-elf or aarch64_be-none-elf. (I've verified
On 23/04/14 16:20, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> This patch is a small tidy of a more-complicated expression that just flips a
> single bit and can thus be a simple XOR.
>
> No regressions on aarch64-none-elf or aarch64_be-none-elf. (I've verified
> code
> is indeed exercised by dg-torture.exp vshuf-v
This patch is a small tidy of a more-complicated expression that just flips a
single bit and can thus be a simple XOR.
No regressions on aarch64-none-elf or aarch64_be-none-elf. (I've verified code
is indeed exercised by dg-torture.exp vshuf-v*.c).
Also ok after applying TBL and testsuite pat
