Re: Ping Re: Add option for whether ceil etc. can raise "inexact", adjust x86 conditions

2016-06-02 Thread Joseph Myers
On Thu, 2 Jun 2016, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Ping. This patch > > is pending > > review (for the non-x86-specific parts). > The inliner bits looks fine to me. Of course it is easy to check whether the > function actually calls floor/ceil

Re: Ping Re: Add option for whether ceil etc. can raise "inexact", adjust x86 conditions

2016-06-02 Thread Joseph Myers
On Thu, 2 Jun 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 06/02/2016 02:00 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > Ping. This patch > > > is pending > > > review (for the non-x86-specific parts). > > The inliner bits looks fine to me. > > In case that leaves a

Re: Ping Re: Add option for whether ceil etc. can raise "inexact", adjust x86 conditions

2016-06-02 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 06/02/2016 02:00 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: Ping. This patch is pending review (for the non-x86-specific parts). The inliner bits looks fine to me. In case that leaves anything unapproved, the remaining parts are OK too, modulo one qu

Re: Ping Re: Add option for whether ceil etc. can raise "inexact", adjust x86 conditions

2016-06-02 Thread Jan Hubicka
> Ping. This patch > is pending > review (for the non-x86-specific parts). The inliner bits looks fine to me. Of course it is easy to check whether the function actually calls floor/ceil and thus is affected by this flag. Do you expect

Ping Re: Add option for whether ceil etc. can raise "inexact", adjust x86 conditions

2016-06-02 Thread Joseph Myers
Ping. This patch is pending review (for the non-x86-specific parts). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com