From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-519308-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 1344 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2020 03:41:44 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 1274 invoked by uid 89); 11 Feb 2020 03:41:37 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=
X-HELO: gate.crashing.org
Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 03:41:36 +0000
Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 01B3fYJO029462;	Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:41:34 -0600
Received: (from segher@localhost)	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 01B3fXre029459;	Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:41:33 -0600
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 03:41:00 -0000
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: will schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add ppc_ieee128_ok target-supports proc
Message-ID: <20200211034133.GS22482@gate.crashing.org>
References: <192d0b37e3b4eb47d0c9eab58a6f359cbf130453.camel@vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <192d0b37e3b4eb47d0c9eab58a6f359cbf130453.camel@vnet.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2020-02/txt/msg00618.txt.bz2

Hi!

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 03:39:49PM -0600, will schmidt wrote:
> This adds a target_supports entry to check that the
> _ieee128 keyword is understood by the target.

(Two underscores, "__ieee128".)

> Also adds that require-effective-target check to the
> existing pr92796 testcase.

> +# See if the __ieee128 keyword is understood.
> +proc check_effective_target_ppc_ieee128_ok { } {
> +    return [check_cached_effective_target ppc_ieee128_ok {
> +	# disable on Darwin, AIX.
> +	if { [istarget powerpc-*-eabi]
> +	     || [istarget powerpc*-*-eabispe]
> +	     || [istarget *-*-darwin*]
> +	     || [istarget *-*-aix*] } {
> +	    expr 0

Do we need to exclude those two explicitly?  Why?  And why eabi?  And
you don't need eabispe either.

> +	} else {
> +	    set options "-mvsx"
> +	    check_runtime_nocache ppc_ieee128_ok {
> +		int main()
> +		{
> +		  __ieee128 a;
> +		  return 0;
> +		}
> +	    } $options
> +	}

Why do you use -mvsx while we actually need a superset of that?


Segher