Hardev wrote: > Shahab wrote: > > > > Vadim wrote: > > > > > > > > > The original code is obviously optimized out, but the intention, I > > > believe, was to check if the jump is conditional or not. > > > So the proper fix should change the code to check cond: > > > > > > - if (ARC_CC_AL) > > > + if (cond == ARC_CC_AL) > > > > > > That is absolutely correct. If a new patch is not submitted soon > > I'll try to fix it myself. > > if you are okay with that then I can proceed by submitting version 2 > of the patch with the proposed changes included Of course. Please go ahead. To be clear, What I meant by "soon" was something around a week time. Cheers, Shahab
