On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 09:32:13PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> (I've had some possible mailer problems with previous patches, so
> I will try both inserting the patch and providing an attachment. Please
> let me know which (if either) is preferable.)
Both are quoted-printable, which is just awfu
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> >> Once more with feeling... I've revised my v2 patch to rename the
> >> functions to __builtin_q rather than __builtin_f128 to avoid
> >> the collision with Joseph's work. I've also corrected the
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> Once more with feeling... I've revised my v2 patch to rename the
>> functions to __builtin_q rather than __builtin_f128 to avoid
>> the collision with Joseph's work. I've also corrected the formatting
>> problems that Segher noted with my p
Hello!
> Once more with feeling... I've revised my v2 patch to rename the
> functions to __builtin_q rather than __builtin_f128 to avoid
> the collision with Joseph's work. I've also corrected the formatting
> problems that Segher noted with my previous attempt.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on po
Hi,
Once more with feeling... I've revised my v2 patch to rename the
functions to __builtin_q rather than __builtin_f128 to avoid
the collision with Joseph's work. I've also corrected the formatting
problems that Segher noted with my previous attempt.
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-unkn
