On 26 October 2014 16:50, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> I've just realized afterwards that the tests aren't guarded against
> targets not supporting Neon.
>
> How about adding the attached small patch?
+if {[istarget arm*-*-*]
+&& ![check_effective_target_arm_neon_ok]} then {
+ return
+}
+
Umm,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
> On 24 October 2014 10:07, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
>> On 21 October 2014 14:02, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> This patch series is an updated version of the series I sent here:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00022.html
>>>
ping?
On 26 October 2014 17:50, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 24 October 2014 10:07, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
>> On 21 October 2014 14:02, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> This patch series is an updated version of the series I sent here:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00022.html
>>>
On 24 October 2014 10:07, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 21 October 2014 14:02, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> This patch series is an updated version of the series I sent here:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00022.html
>>
>> I addressed comments from Marcus and Richard, and decided to
On 21 October 2014 14:02, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> This patch series is an updated version of the series I sent here:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00022.html
>
> I addressed comments from Marcus and Richard, and decided to skip
> support for half-precision variants for the time
This patch series is an updated version of the series I sent here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00022.html
I addressed comments from Marcus and Richard, and decided to skip
support for half-precision variants for the time being. I'll post
dedicated patches later.
Compared to v2:
