From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32684383F864 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:12 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 32684383F864 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 20SKa4tY009736; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:11 GMT Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3dvmpj4eu6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:11 +0000 Received: from m0098399.ppops.net (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 20SLIu6Y025952; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:10 GMT Received: from ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (a.bd.3ea9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.62.189.10]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3dvmpj4ety-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:10 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma02dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 20SLJSMI020451; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:09 GMT Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.29]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3dt1xcb6p8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:09 +0000 Received: from b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.107]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 20SLL7mX30605598 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:07 GMT Received: from b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F26124054; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28F3124060; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.211.95.53] (unknown [9.211.95.53]) by b01ledav002.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:05 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <05932e25-fa59-6974-94d9-3d2d317bebf8@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 15:21:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1 Reply-To: wschmidt@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] rs6000: Don't #ifdef "short" built-in names To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, dje.gcc@gmail.com References: <68d0e1d61ff7834c90b598a17266cb5fbb60a77c.1643390744.git.wschmidt@linux.ibm.com> <20220128203252.GH614@gate.crashing.org> From: Bill Schmidt In-Reply-To: <20220128203252.GH614@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: lvogaEscXq2bduCmbXT1t8gEaTRKv1t7 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: UW7g99OgJkjBMY8psU5ki1L1KVvWm0sG X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.816,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2022-01-28_07,2022-01-28_01,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000 definitions=main-2201280120 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 21:21:13 -0000 On 1/28/22 2:32 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:20AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: >> It was recently pointed out that we get anomalous behavior when using >> __attribute__((target)) to select a CPU. As an example, when building for >> -mcpu=power8 but using __attribute__((target("mcpu=power10")), it is legal >> to call __builtin_vec_mod, but not vec_mod, even though these are >> equivalent. This is because the equivalence is established with a #define >> that is guarded by #ifdef _ARCH_PWR10. > Yeah that is bad. > >> This goofy behavior occurs with both the old builtins support and the >> new. One of the goals of the new builtins support was to make sure all >> appropriate interfaces are available using __attribute__((target)), so I >> failed in this respect. This patch corrects the problem by removing the >> apply. For example, #ifdef __PPU__ is still appropriate. > "By removing the apply"... What does that mean? Er, wow.  Meant to say "by removing the #define."  Strange error... will fix. Thanks for catching that! Bill > > Nice cleanup (and nice bugfix of course). Okay for trunk (with that > comment improved a bit perhaps). Thanks! > > > Segher