On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 15:55:46 +0100
Richard Henderson wrote:
> We added the entry to insn-data.def, but failed to update op_risbg
> to match. No need to special-case the imask inversion, since that
> is already ~0 for RISBG (and now RISBGN).
>
> Fixes: 375ee58bedcda359011fe7fa99e0647f66f9ffa0
>
On 11/08/2017 12:50 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> I can queue this to s390-fixes (unless there are other takers).
Please do. Thanks,
r~
On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 15:55:46 +0100
Richard Henderson wrote:
> We added the entry to insn-data.def, but failed to update op_risbg
> to match. No need to special-case the imask inversion, since that
> is already ~0 for RISBG (and now RISBGN).
>
> Fixes: 375ee58bedcda359011fe7fa99e0647f66f9ffa0
>
On 7 November 2017 at 16:00, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 07.11.2017 15:55, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> We added the entry to insn-data.def, but failed to update op_risbg
>> to match. No need to special-case the imask inversion, since that
>> is already ~0 for RISBG (and now RISBGN).
>>
>> Fixes: 375e
On 07.11.2017 15:55, Richard Henderson wrote:
> We added the entry to insn-data.def, but failed to update op_risbg
> to match. No need to special-case the imask inversion, since that
> is already ~0 for RISBG (and now RISBGN).
>
> Fixes: 375ee58bedcda359011fe7fa99e0647f66f9ffa0
> Fixes: https://b