From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 36B5A3858D39; Thu,  3 Mar 2022 17:05:23 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 36B5A3858D39
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/99708] __SIZEOF_FLOAT128__ not defined on
 powerpc64le-linux
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2022 17:05:22 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-99708-4-Oz9RZhIlDH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-99708-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-99708-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2022 17:05:23 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99708

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I see
  if (TARGET_FLOAT128_TYPE)
    {
      if (!TARGET_IEEEQUAD && TARGET_LONG_DOUBLE_128)
        ibm128_float_type_node =3D long_double_type_node;
      else
        {
          ibm128_float_type_node =3D make_node (REAL_TYPE);
          TYPE_PRECISION (ibm128_float_type_node) =3D 128;
          SET_TYPE_MODE (ibm128_float_type_node, IFmode);
          layout_type (ibm128_float_type_node);
        }
      t =3D build_qualified_type (ibm128_float_type_node, TYPE_QUAL_CONST);
      ptr_ibm128_float_type_node =3D build_pointer_type (t);
      lang_hooks.types.register_builtin_type (ibm128_float_type_node,
                                              "__ibm128");

      if (TARGET_IEEEQUAD && TARGET_LONG_DOUBLE_128)
        ieee128_float_type_node =3D long_double_type_node;
      else
        ieee128_float_type_node =3D float128_type_node;
      t =3D build_qualified_type (ieee128_float_type_node, TYPE_QUAL_CONST);
      ptr_ieee128_float_type_node =3D build_pointer_type (t);
      lang_hooks.types.register_builtin_type (ieee128_float_type_node,
                                              "__ieee128");
    }

  else
    ieee128_float_type_node =3D ibm128_float_type_node =3D long_double_type=
_node;

Doesn't this mean that ieee128_float_type_node and ibm128_float_type_node is
always non-NULL?
So, maybe we shouldn't test whether those are non-NULL, but whether the name
of say ieee128_float_type_node is __ieee128 and similarly if
ibm128_float_type_node's name is __ibm128?
Though, __SIZEOF_FLOAT128__ macro talks about __float128 which is on ppc64 a
macro, so
probably it needs to be that plus whether __float128 is defined to __ieee12=
8.=