<html>
    <head>
      <base href="http://llvm.org/bugs/" />
    </head>
    <body><span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:hfinkel@anl.gov" title="Hal Finkel <hfinkel@anl.gov>"> <span class="fn">Hal Finkel</span></a>
</span> changed
              <a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_RESOLVED  bz_closed"
   title="RESOLVED FIXED - CodeGen/PowerPC/unal-altivec.ll is failing with LLVM 3.5 RC 2"
   href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20576">bug 20576</a>
        <br>
             <table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8">
          <tr>
            <th>What</th>
            <th>Removed</th>
            <th>Added</th>
          </tr>

         <tr>
           <td style="text-align:right;">Status</td>
           <td>ASSIGNED
           </td>
           <td>RESOLVED
           </td>
         </tr>

         <tr>
           <td style="text-align:right;">Resolution</td>
           <td>---
           </td>
           <td>FIXED
           </td>
         </tr></table>
      <p>
        <div>
            <b><a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_RESOLVED  bz_closed"
   title="RESOLVED FIXED - CodeGen/PowerPC/unal-altivec.ll is failing with LLVM 3.5 RC 2"
   href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20576#c10">Comment # 10</a>
              on <a class="bz_bug_link 
          bz_status_RESOLVED  bz_closed"
   title="RESOLVED FIXED - CodeGen/PowerPC/unal-altivec.ll is failing with LLVM 3.5 RC 2"
   href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20576">bug 20576</a>
              from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:hfinkel@anl.gov" title="Hal Finkel <hfinkel@anl.gov>"> <span class="fn">Hal Finkel</span></a>
</span></b>
        <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=20576#c9">comment #9</a>)
<span class="quote">> I think it comes down to your risk vs benefit assessment on the PPC change. 
> I would lean against taking it, because, as you note, it requires some
> fairly scary infrastructure changes that have not had much time to bake. 
> However, if you tell me that PPC is totally broken without it, I might be
> convinced, but my gut is against it.</span >

I think we're on the same page. I'd like to give the changes bake time, and I
don't consider PPC totally broken without the fixes (I believe this bug shipped
in 3.4 and we did not notice for a long time). My preference is that we queue
these patches for inclusion in 3.5.1 (assuming they stick). I want to be
confident that the cure is not worse than the disease ;)</pre>
        </div>
      </p>
      <hr>
      <span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
      
      <ul>
          <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
      </ul>
    </body>
</html>