From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28541 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2014 19:49:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 28482 invoked by uid 48); 30 Apr 2014 19:49:40 -0000 From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/60847] [4.9/4.10 Regression] x86 BMI intrinsics not recognized Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 19:49:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg02315.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60847 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Sanjay Patel from comment #8) > Thanks, Jakub. > > I see that the fix duplicates all of the intrinsics with a > double-leading-underscore variant. Why do we need that? AFAIK, no other x86 > intrinsics have this kind of duplication. That is because one kind of these intrinsics originates from AMD (support for AMD BMI is what went into GCC first) and the other from ICC which chose to provide different names. So, for backwards compatibility we need both sets.