Kewen:
Sorry for the delay in getting the patch committed. Thanks for all the
help.
Carl
On 11/24/24 5:43 AM, Kewen Lin wrote:
rs6000, Remove redundant built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp
The built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp can be covered with PVIPR
functi
Kewen:
OK, thanks for the approval. Sorry for the delay in getting it committed.
Carl
On 11/24/24 5:43 AM, Kewen Lin wrote:
---
rs6000, remove built-ins __builtin_vsx_vperm
Kewen:
I fixed the space issue and moved the sll, ull and bll together. Sorry
for the delay in getting the patch committed.
Thanks for all the help.
Carl
On 11/24/24 5:43 AM, Kewen Lin wrote:
extern __vector int si[][4];
extern __vector short ss[][4];
exter
Kewen:
Thanks for the approval. Sorry for the delay in getting this
committed. I made the fix requested and retested the patch on the most
recent mainline. I will get this committed. Thanks for all the help.
Carl
On 11/24/24 5:42 AM, Kewen Lin wrote:
rs6000, f
Ping 6
On 11/14/24 1:36 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 5
On 11/5/24 8:28 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 4
On 10/28/24 4:29 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:44 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping
On 10/1/24 8:12 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC
Ping 6
On 11/14/24 1:36 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 5
On 11/5/24 8:27 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 4
On 10/28/24 4:28 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:43 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping, FYI this is a fairly simple fix to a testcase.
On
Ping 5
On 11/5/24 8:27 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 4
On 10/28/24 4:28 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:43 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping, FYI this is a fairly simple fix to a testcase.
On 10/3/24 8:11 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC
Ping 5
On 11/5/24 8:28 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 4
On 10/28/24 4:29 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:44 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping
On 10/1/24 8:12 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following version 2 of a series of
Ping 4
On 10/28/24 4:29 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:44 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping
On 10/1/24 8:12 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following version 2 of a series of patches for PowerPC removes
some built-ins that
Ping 4
On 10/28/24 4:28 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:43 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping, FYI this is a fairly simple fix to a testcase.
On 10/3/24 8:11 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The builtins-1-10-runnable.c has the
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:44 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping
On 10/1/24 8:12 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following version 2 of a series of patches for PowerPC removes
some built-ins that are covered by existing overloaded built-ins
Ping 3
On 10/17/24 1:31 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:43 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping, FYI this is a fairly simple fix to a testcase.
On 10/3/24 8:11 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The builtins-1-10-runnable.c has the debugging inadvertently
enabled. The test uses
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:43 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping, FYI this is a fairly simple fix to a testcase.
On 10/3/24 8:11 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The builtins-1-10-runnable.c has the debugging inadvertently
enabled. The test uses #ifdef to enable/disable the debugging
Ping 2
On 10/9/24 7:44 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Ping
On 10/1/24 8:12 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following version 2 of a series of patches for PowerPC removes
some built-ins that are covered by existing overloaded built-ins.
Additionally, there are patches to add missing
Ping
On 10/1/24 8:12 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following version 2 of a series of patches for PowerPC removes
some built-ins that are covered by existing overloaded built-ins.
Additionally, there are patches to add missing testcases and
documentation. The original
Ping, FYI this is a fairly simple fix to a testcase.
On 10/3/24 8:11 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The builtins-1-10-runnable.c has the debugging inadvertently enabled.
The test uses #ifdef to enable/disable the debugging. Unfortunately,
the #define DEBUG was set to 0 to disable
GCC maintainers:
The builtins-1-10-runnable.c has the debugging inadvertently enabled.
The test uses #ifdef to enable/disable the debugging. Unfortunately, the
#define DEBUG was set to 0 to disable debugging and enable the call to
abort in case of error. The #define should have been removed
GCC maintainers:
Version 2, added the argument changes for the__builtin_vsx_uns_double[e
| o | h | l ]_v4si built-ins. Added support to the vector {un,}signed
int to vector float builtins so they are supported using Altivec
instructions if VSX is not available per the feedback comments.
Th
GCC maintainers:
version 2, added the reference to the patch where the removal of the
built-ins was missed. Note, patch was approved by Kewen with this change.
The following patch removes two redundant built-ins
__builtin_vsx_vperm_8hi and __builtin_vsx_vperm_8hi_uns. The built-ins
are c
GCC maintainers:
Version 2: Fixed the wording in the changelog per the feedback. With
this change the patch was approved by Kewen.
The patch removed the built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp as it is covered
by the overloaded vec_doubleo built-in.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 LE and
---
From 4c672e8895107bc1f62e09122e7af157436cb83d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Carl Love
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:31:34 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] rs6000, add testcases to the overloaded vec_perm
built-in
The overloaded vec_perm built-in supports permuting signed and
GCC maintainers:
The following version 2 of a series of patches for PowerPC removes some
built-ins that are covered by existing overloaded built-ins.
Additionally, there are patches to add missing testcases and
documentation. The original version of the patch series was posted on
8/7/2024.
:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/8/8 01:15, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following patch removes two redundant built-ins __builtin_vsx_vperm_8hi and
__builtin_vsx_vperm_8hi_uns. The built-ins are covered by the overloaded
vec_perm built-in.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 LE and BE wi
:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/8/8 01:15, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following patch fixes errors in the definition of the
__builtin_vsx_uns_floate_v2di, __builtin_vsx_uns_floato_v2di and
__builtin_vsx_uns_float2_v2di built-ins. The arguments should be unsigned but
are listed as s
GCC maintainers:
Here is my respnses to the review comments by Kewen. Unfortunately,
Kewen is no longer working on GCC power.
I will submit an updated version of the patch with Kewen's suggested
changes.
Carl
On 8/9/24 3:11 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
rs600
:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/8/8 01:15, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following patch adds missing test cases for the overloaded vec_perm
built-in. It also fixes and issue with printing the 128-bit values in the
DEBUG section that was noticed when adding the additional test cases.
The patch has
GCC maintainers:
Please ignore this patch. Attached the wrong patch to the message.
Sorry for the noise.
Carl
On 9/19/24 4:40 PM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
This patch removes an expected value change that was made to verify
the error checking for the
Power 10.
Please let me know if the patch is acceptable for mainline. Thanks.
Carl Love
-
rs6000, Fix test builtins-1-p10-runnable.c
The first element of the expected result was apparently changed
for te
Gcc maintainers:
Version 3, fixed a few typos per Kewen's review. Fixed the expected
number of scan-assembler-times for xvtlsbb and setbc. Retested on Power
10 LE.
Version 2, based on discussion additional overloaded instances of the
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and, vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros buil
Kewen:
On 8/20/24 12:56 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/8/9 23:57, Carl Love wrote:
Gcc maintainers:
Version 2, based on discussion additional overloaded instances of the
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and, vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros built-ins has been added.
The additional instances are for
Ping.
Carl
On 8/9/24 8:57 AM, Carl Love wrote:
Gcc maintainers:
Version 2, based on discussion additional overloaded instances of the
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and, vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros built-ins has been
added. The additional instances are for arguments of vector signed
Kewen:
Ping.
Carl
On 8/7/24 10:15 AM, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following patch fixes errors in the definition of the
__builtin_vsx_uns_floate_v2di, __builtin_vsx_uns_floato_v2di and
__builtin_vsx_uns_float2_v2di built-ins. The arguments should be
unsigned but
Gcc maintainers:
Version 2, based on discussion additional overloaded instances of the
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and, vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros built-ins has been
added. The additional instances are for arguments of vector signed char
and vector bool char. The patch has been tested on Power 10
story of altivec.h to
support both unsigned/sign char for
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones, vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros
And this might make life a little easier for users.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 10:12 AM Carl Love wrote:
Steve:
Agreed the documentation only specifies unsigned char argument for
GCC maintainers:
The following patch fixes errors in the definition of the
__builtin_vsx_uns_floate_v2di, __builtin_vsx_uns_floato_v2di and
__builtin_vsx_uns_float2_v2di built-ins. The arguments should be
unsigned but are listed as signed.
Additionally, there are a number of test cases
GCC maintainers:
The patch removed the built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp as it is covered
by the overloaded vec_doubleo built-in.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 LE and BE with no regressions.
Please let me know if it is acceptable for mainline. Thanks.
Carl
---
GCC maintainers:
The following patch removes two redundant built-ins
__builtin_vsx_vperm_8hi and __builtin_vsx_vperm_8hi_uns. The built-ins
are covered by the overloaded vec_perm built-in.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 LE and BE with no regressions.
Please let me know if it is acc
GCC maintainers:
The following patch adds missing test cases for the overloaded vec_perm
built-in. It also fixes and issue with printing the 128-bit values in
the DEBUG section that was noticed when adding the additional test cases.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 LE and BE with no r
GCC maintainers:
The following series of patches for PowerPC removes some built-ins that
are covered by existing overloaded built-ins. Additionally, there are
patches to add missing testcases and documentation.
The patch series has been tested on Power 10 LE and BE with no regressions.
Pl
vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros
both specify vector unsigned char, only.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 1:15 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
on 2024/8/3 05:48, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 7/31/24 10:21 PM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> on 2024/8/1 01:52, Carl Love wrote:
>>> Yes, I noticed that the built-ins were def
Kewen:
On 8/4/24 11:13 PM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/8/2 03:35, Carl Love wrote:
GCC developers:
Version 3, updated the testcase dg-do link to dg-do compile. Moved the new
documentation again. Retested on Power 10 LE and BE to verify the dg arguments
disable the test on Power10BE
GCC developers:
Version 3, updated the testcase dg-do link to dg-do compile. Moved the
new documentation again. Retested on Power 10 LE and BE to verify the
dg arguments disable the test on Power10BE but enable the test for
Power10LE. Reran the full regression testsuite. There were no new
Kewen:
On 7/29/24 3:21 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
+@smallexample
+@exdent vector signed __int128 vec_sld (vector signed __int128,
+vector signed __int128, const unsigned int);
+@exdent vector unsigned __int128 vec_sld (vector unsigned __int128,
+vector unsigned __int128, const unsigned int);
+@exden
Kewen:
On 7/31/24 2:12 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/7/27 06:56, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
Per a report from a user, the existing vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and,
vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros built-ins are not documented in the GCC documentation
file.
The following patch adds
Peter, Kewen:
Per Peter's request, I did the following testing on ltcd97-lp7 which is
a Power 10 running in BE mode.
On 7/29/24 8:47 AM, Peter Bergner wrote:
Maybe the following will work?
+/* { dg-do run { target power10_hw } } */
+/* { dg-do link { target { ! power10_hw } } } */
+/* { d
Kewen:
On 7/29/24 3:21 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
index 0d3e0a24e11..75d95ccfb47 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/vector.md
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/vector.md
@@ -26,7 +26,8 @@
;; Vector int modes
(define_mode_iterator VEC_I [V16QI V8HI V4SI V2DI])
-;; Vector int modes for comparison, shift and rota
GCC maintainers:
This patch adds a comment to the VEC_IC definitions to clarify the V1TI
"TARGET_POWER10" mode per the request by Segher in the feedback to patch
"https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-July/658156.html";.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-July/658156.html
GCC maintainers:
Per a report from a user, the existing vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and,
vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros built-ins are not documented in the GCC
documentation file.
The following patch adds missing documentation for the
vec_test_lsbb_all_ones and, vec_test_lsbb_all_zeros built-ins.
Plea
GCC developers:
Version 2, updated rs6000-overload.def to remove adding additonal
internal names and to change XXSLDWI_Q to XXSLDWI_1TI per comments from
Kewen. Move new documentation statement for the PIVPR built-ins per
comments from Kewen. Updated dg-do-run directive and added comment
ab
Segher:
On 7/24/24 11:47 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 11:38:11AM -0700, Carl Love wrote:
On 7/24/24 10:03 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
So much manual stuff needed, sigh.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 01:04:12PM -0700, Carl Love wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config
Peter, Segher:
On 7/23/24 2:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
On 7/19/24 3:04 PM, Carl Love wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md b/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md
index 5af9bf920a2..2a18ee44526 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md
@@ -878,9 +878,9
Kewen:
On 7/25/24 1:21 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
Some minor comments are inlined on top of Segher's and Peter's comments.
on 2024/7/20 04:04, Carl Love wrote:
GCC developers:
The following patch adds the int128 varients to the existing overloaded
built-ins vec_sld, vec_sldb
Kewen:
On 7/25/24 1:24 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
optimization the number of assembly generated for the two methods are
similar. With -O3 optimization, the assembly generated for the two
approaches is identical for the 2DF and 2DI types. The assembly for
the C-code version of the 1Ti requres one
Kewen:
On 7/25/24 1:21 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
The patch, first patch in this series, to remove the __builtin_vec_set_v1ti,
__builtin_vec_set_v2df, __builtin_vec_set_v2di was previously posted. The
feedback on the patch was that we could also remove set bif attribute. Removal
of the set bif at
Kewen:
On 7/25/24 1:22 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
on 2024/7/24 01:52, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
This patch was previously posted. Per the feedback, it is now the first of two
patches to remove the set built-ins.
This patch removes the __builtin_vec_set_v1ti, __builtin_vec_set_v2df and
Kewen:
On 7/25/24 1:22 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
-
rs6000, Remove __builtin_vec_set_v1ti, __builtin_vec_set_v2df,
__builtin_vec_set_v2di
Remove the built-ins, use the default gimple gener
Segher:
Thanks for the review, a few questions...
On 7/24/24 10:03 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
So much manual stuff needed, sigh.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 01:04:12PM -0700, Carl Love wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/rs6000/altivec.md (vsdb_): Change
define_insn iterator to
Peter:
On 7/23/24 2:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
On 7/19/24 3:04 PM, Carl Love wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md b/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md
index 5af9bf920a2..2a18ee44526 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.md
@@ -878,9 +878,9
GCC maintainers:
This patch was previously posted. Per the feedback, it is now the first
of two patches to remove the set built-ins.
This patch removes the __builtin_vec_set_v1ti, __builtin_vec_set_v2df
and __builtin_vec_set_v2di built-ins. The users should just use normal
C-code to upda
GCC maintainers:
This patch removes the vsx set built-ins: __builtin_vsx_set_1ti,
__builtin_vsx_set_2df, __builtin_vsx_set_2di. With the removal of
these built-ins, the built-in attribute "set", used in the built-in
definition file, is no longer needed. The "set" and the associated
code f
GCC maintainers:
The code generated by using C-code to set a vector element versus using
a built-in has been investigated. The assembly code generated from the
C-code is as good or better than the assembly code generated for the
built-ins for both the -O0 and -O3 levels of optimization.
For
GCC maintainers:
version 2, Updated patch comments, added missing ChangeLog. Fixed
unintended line removal.
The following patch removes the three __builtin_vsx_xvcmp[eq|ge|gt]sp
builtins as they similar to the overloaded vec_cmp[eq|ge|gt] built-ins.
The difference is the overloaded built-
Kewen:
On 7/22/24 2:09 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/7/18 00:01, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
This patch removes the __builtin_vec_set_v1ti, __builtin_vec_set_v2df and
__builtin_vec_set_v2di built-ins. The users should just use normal C-code to
update the various vector
GCC developers:
The following patch adds the int128 varients to the existing overloaded
built-ins vec_sld, vec_sldb, vec_sldw, vec_sll, vec_slo, vec_srdb,
vec_srl, vec_sro. These varients were requested by Steve Munroe.
The patch has been tested on a Power 10 system with no regressions.
Ple
GCC maintainers:
Version 3, in version 2, the ChangeLog didn't get updated to remove the
LP64 references. Fixed that and updated the patch description per the
feedback from Peter.
Version 2, removed the lp64 from the target per discussion. Tested and
it is not needed. The int128 qualifier
On 7/16/24 6:01 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
On 7/16/24 6:19 PM, Carl Love wrote:
use __int128 types that are not supported on all platforms. The
__int128 type is only supported on 64-bit platforms. Need to check that
the platform is 64-bits and support the __int128 type. Add the int128 and
GCC maintainers:
This patch removes the __builtin_vec_set_v1ti, __builtin_vec_set_v2df
and __builtin_vec_set_v2di built-ins. The users should just use normal
C-code to update the various vector elements. This change was
originally intended to be part of the earlier series of cleanup
patches
GCC maintainers:
The following patch removes the three __builtin_vsx_xvcmp[eq|ge|gt]sp
builtins as they similar to the overloaded vec_cmp[eq|ge|gt] built-ins.
The difference is the overloaded built-ins return a vector of boolean or
a vector of long long booleans where as the removed built-in
GCC maintainers:
Version 2, removed the lp64 from the target per discussion. Tested and
it is not needed. The int128 qualifier is sufficient for the thest to
report as unsupported on a 32-bit Power system.
The tests:
tests builtins-10-runnable.c
tests builtins-10.c
vec_perm-runnabl
Peter:
On 7/15/24 4:14 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
On 7/15/24 5:43 PM, Carl Love wrote:
-/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-do run { target { lp64 } && { int128 } } } */
Why isn't this just:
/* { dg-do run { target int128 } } */
??? The int128 test should disable this on 32-bit
GCC maintainers:
The tests:
tests builtins-10-runnable.c
tests builtins-10.c
vec_perm-runnable-i128.c
generate the following errors when run on a 32-bit BE Power system with
GCC configured with multilib enabled.
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-10-runnable.c (test for excess errors)
F
Kewen:
On 6/18/24 20:04, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/6/14 03:40, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The patch has been updated per the feedback from version 3. Please let me know
it the patch is acceptable for mainline.
Thanks.
Carl
GCC maintainers:
The patch has been updated to remove the customized vec_init built-in
code. Specfivically the init identifier, the related generated code for
the init built-in attribute bit, function
altivec_expand_vec_init_builtin and calls to the function.
Please let me know if the patc
GCC maintainers:
I moved the removal of built-ins __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpsxws and
__builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxws from patch 4 to patch patch 2.
I fixed various issues with the ChangeLog wording, spaces and descriptions.
Fixed the comments in file gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md.
Updated the built-in desc
GCC maintainers:
Per the comments on patch 2 from version 4, I have moved the removal of
built-ins __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpsxws and __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxws from patch 4 to
this patch.
Please let me know if this patch is acceptable. Thanks.
Carl
-
GCC maintainers:
The following is the updates to the three patches that have yet to be approved.
Patches 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12 were approved in the version 3 or earlier.
Patches 7 and 11 from version 4 were approved with minor nits fixed.
This leaves patches 2, 4 and 13 still to be appr
On 7/3/24 2:36 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi Carl,
on 2024/6/27 01:05, Carl Love wrote:
GCC maintainers:
The following patch updates the user documentation for the vec_ld, vec_lde,
vec_st and vec_ste built-ins to make it clearer that there are data alignment
requirements for these built-ins
GCC maintainers:
The following patch updates the user documentation for the vec_ld, vec_lde,
vec_st and vec_ste built-ins to make it clearer that there are data alignment
requirements for these built-ins. If the data alignment requirements are not
followed, the data loaded or stored by these b
Kewen:
On 6/23/24 19:41, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on 2024/6/22 00:15, Carl Love wrote:
>> GCC maintainers:
>>
>> version 2, update the dg options per the feedback. Retested the patch on
>> Power 10 with no regressions.
>>
>> This patch updates th
GCC maintainers:
version 3, rebased on current mainline tree. Version 2 of the patch was out of
sync. Retested the patch on
Power 10 with no regressions.
version 2, update the dg options per the feedback. Retested the patch on Power
10 with no regressions.
This patch updates the dg options.
Kewen:
On 6/18/24 20:03, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi Carl,
>
> on 2024/6/14 03:40, Carl Love wrote:
>> GCC maintainers:
>>
>> Per the comments on patch 0004 from version 3, the removal of
>> The built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxds_uns and __builtin_vsx_xvcvspuxws was
On 6/18/24 20:03, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi Carl,
>
> on 2024/6/14 03:40, Carl Love wrote:
>>
>> GCC maintainers:
>>
>> As noted the removal of __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxds_uns and
>> __builtin_vsx_xvcvspuxws was moved to patch 2 in the seris. The patch has
set to power7, needs to be power8. Patch
has been retested on a Power 10 box, it succeeds
with 2 passes and no fails.
Per the additional feedback after patch:
commit c892525813c94b018464d5a4edc17f79186606b7
Author: Carl Love
Date: Tue Jun 11 14:01:16 2024 -0400
rs6000, altivec-2
GCC maintainers:
version 2, update the dg options per the feedback. Retested the patch on Power
10 with no regressions.
This patch updates the dg options.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 with no regression failures.
Please let me know if this patch is acceptable for mainline. Thanks.
Kewen:
On 6/21/24 03:37, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi Carl,
>
> on 2024/6/20 00:18, Carl Love wrote:
>> GCC maintainers:
>>
>> The dg options for this test should be the same as for altivec-2-runnable.c.
>> This patch updates the dg options to match
>> the sett
GCC maintainers:
Per the discussion of the dg header changes for test files altivec-1-runnable.c
and altivec-2-runnable.c it was decided it would be best to change the names of
the two tests to better align them with the tests that they are better aligned
with.
This patch is dependent on the t
Kewen:
On 6/21/24 03:36, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi Carl,
>
> on 2024/6/20 00:13, Carl Love wrote:
>> GCC maintainers:
>>
>> version 2: Updated per the feedback from Peter, Kewen and Segher. Note,
>> Peter suggested the -mdejagnu-cpu= value must be power7.
>&
GCC maintainers:
The dg options for this test should be the same as for altivec-2-runnable.c.
This patch updates the dg options to match
the settings in altivec-2-runnable.c.
The patch has been tested on Power 10 with no regression failures.
Please let me know if this patch is acceptable for
Everyone, Oops, this should be version 3 not 2. Sorry.
Carl
On 6/19/24 09:13, Carl Love wrote:
> GCC maintainers:
>
> version 2: Updated per the feedback from Peter, Kewen and Segher. Note,
> Peter suggested the -mdejagnu-cpu= value must be power7.
> Th
no fails.
Per the additional feedback after patch:
commit c892525813c94b018464d5a4edc17f79186606b7
Author: Carl Love
Date: Tue Jun 11 14:01:16 2024 -0400
rs6000, altivec-2-runnable.c should be a runnable test
The test case has "dg-do compile" set not "d
Kewen, Peter, Segher:
On 6/17/24 19:56, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on 2024/6/18 00:08, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On 6/14/24 1:37 PM, Carl Love wrote:
>>> Per the additional feedback after patch:
>>>
>>> commit c892525813c94b018464d5a4edc17f79186606b7
GCC maintainers:
Per the additional feedback after patch:
commit c892525813c94b018464d5a4edc17f79186606b7
Author: Carl Love
Date: Tue Jun 11 14:01:16 2024 -0400
rs6000, altivec-2-runnable.c should be a runnable test
The test case has "dg-do compile" set not
Segher:
On 6/13/24 12:51, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/altivec-2-runnable.c
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/altivec-2-runnable.c
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -/* { dg-do compile { target powerpc*-*-* } } */
>> +/* { dg-do run { target powerpc*-*-* }
GCC maintainers:
As noted the removal of __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxds_uns and
__builtin_vsx_xvcvspuxws was moved to patch 2 in the seris. The patch has been
updated per the comments from version 3.
Please let me know if this patch is acceptable for mainline.
Carl
GCC maintainers:
The patch has been updated per the comments from version 3. Please let me know
if the patch is acceptable for mainline.
Carl
-
rs6000, add overloaded vec_sel with int128 arguments
Extend
Kewen:
On 6/3/24 22:59, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on 2024/5/30 00:16, Carl Love wrote:
>> This was patch 13 from the previous series. Note the previous series patch
>> 12 was dropped. This patch is the same as the previous version. The
>> additional work to rem
GCC maintainers:
I have addressed the comments to the five patches in the series that have not
yet been approved.
The patches that have already been approved are 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12.
The remaining patches all have fairly minor fixes requested. I will just post
version 4 of these patch
GCC maintainers:
The patch has been updated per the feedback from version 3. Please let me know
it the patch is acceptable for mainline.
Thanks.
Carl
--
rs6000, remove vector set and vector
GCC maintainers:
The patch has been updated per the comments from version 3. Please let me know
if the patch is acceptable for mainline.
Thanks.
Carl
-
rs6000, extend vec_xxpermdi built-in for __int128 ar
GCC maintainers:
Per the comments on patch 0004 from version 3, the removal of
The built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxds_uns and __builtin_vsx_xvcvspuxws was
moved to this patch. The rest of the patch is unchanged from version 3. There
were no comments on this patch for version 3.
Please let me
1 - 100 of 496 matches
Mail list logo
