Contribution of PowerPC port (continuation of 422063005) - PPC dir update 2

Contribution of PowerPC port (continuation of 422063005) - PPC dir update 2

Contribution of PowerPC port (continuation of 422063005, 817143002,
866843003, and 901083004. This patch brings the ppc directories up to
date with the change from the last few weeks.  There are two common
files changed, but changes are limited to code guarded by ifdefs
for the PPC platform

subsequent patches will cover:
- individual optimizations for PPC (5)
- remaining AIX changes not resolved by 4.8 compiler (4.8 is only recently available
for AIX)
- incremental updates required to ppc directories due to platform specific changes
made in google repos while we complete the above steps (like this update).

	modified:   src/compiler/ppc/code-generator-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/compiler/ppc/instruction-selector-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/disassembler.cc
	modified:   src/ic/ppc/handler-compiler-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ic/ppc/ic-compiler-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/assembler-ppc-inl.h
	modified:   src/ppc/assembler-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/assembler-ppc.h
	modified:   src/ppc/builtins-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/code-stubs-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/deoptimizer-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/disasm-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/full-codegen-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/ppc/macro-assembler-ppc.cc
	modified:   src/serialize.cc


R=danno@chromium.org, svenpanne@chromium.org

BUG=

[michael_dawson, 2015-02-18 16:57:45]

I see that the patch contains changes other than those that I made. They seem to
be ones that were pulled in when I did a re-base to become current. 

Am I doing something wrong as I assume the patch uploaded should just show the
changes that are being contributed

[Sven Panne, 2015-02-19 12:09:03]

On 2015/02/18 16:57:45, michael_dawson wrote:
> I see that the patch contains changes other than those that I made. They seem
to
> be ones that were pulled in when I did a re-base to become current. 
> 
> Am I doing something wrong as I assume the patch uploaded should just show the
> changes that are being contributed

Hmmm, I don't know what went wrong. Did you use 'git new-branch' (i.e.
depot_tools) to create the branch for this CL? 'git checkout -b' alone is not
enough (for some arcane reason I don't know). To review and land this without a
merging horror, we need a clean CL.

[michael_dawson, 2015-02-19 14:40:44]

I did not use git new-branch so rebuilt using that. I tried to specify
BUG=936813002 so that it would upload the patch on this review, but it did not
do that and created 936813002 instead. 

One more question.  When I do a rebase should I do something other than 

git pull --rebase origin master

[Sven Panne, 2015-02-19 15:10:37]

On 2015/02/19 14:40:44, michael_dawson wrote:
> I did not use git new-branch so rebuilt using that. I tried to specify
> BUG=936813002 so that it would upload the patch on this review, but it did not
> do that and created 936813002 instead. 
> 
> One more question.  When I do a rebase should I do something other than 
> 
> git pull --rebase origin master

I think the correct workflow is (at least that's mine :-) :

   gclient sync  # make sure all dependencies are up-to-date
   git pull --rebase  # make sure your master is up-to-date
   git new-branch my-cool-branch  # switch to a new correctly tracked branch
   git cl issue 936813002  # associate the branch with that issue
   <make the actual local modifications to the sources>
   git commit -a -m "I did this and that..."
   git pull --rebase  # make sure your branch is up-to-date
   git cl upload

[Sven Panne, 2015-02-19 15:12:12]

closing this bug, reviewing the new one...