nemanjai added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/Headers/altivec.h:314 + vector signed int __carry = __c & __mask; + return vec_add(vec_add(__a, __b), __mask); +} ---------------- I don't understand why we're adding `__mask` to the sum of `__a` and `__b`. Shouldn't that be `__carry`? ================ Comment at: lib/Headers/altivec.h:322 + vector unsigned int __carry = __c & __mask; + return vec_add(vec_add(__a, __b), __mask); +} ---------------- Same comment as above. ================ Comment at: lib/Headers/altivec.h:349 + unsigned int __tempc = (unsigned int) __c[i]; + __tempc = __tempc & 0x00000001; + unsigned long long __longa = (unsigned long long) __tempa; ---------------- Is it not a little cleaner and more readable to just mask out the `__c` parameter before the loop (similarly to the masking you've done with `__mask` above)? ================ Comment at: lib/Headers/altivec.h:350 + __tempc = __tempc & 0x00000001; + unsigned long long __longa = (unsigned long long) __tempa; + unsigned long long __longb = (unsigned long long) __tempb; ---------------- I think it's a little more clear and obvious what is happening if you actually have just a single cast and mask - i.e. ``` unsigned long long __longa = ((unsigned long long) __a[i]) & 0xFFFFFFFF;``` https://reviews.llvm.org/D26544 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
