From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1979C396E843 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 23:41:31 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 1979C396E843 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 173NeT3k013473; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:40:29 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 173NeS74013472; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:40:28 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:40:22 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: will schmidt Cc: Bill Schmidt , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 46/55] rs6000: Builtin expansion, part 3 Message-ID: <20210803234022.GW1583@gate.crashing.org> References: <7d3846877141b74d4042aec96b9147a7e9d7285c.1623941442.git.wschmidt@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, TXREP, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR, T_SPF_PERMERROR autolearn=no 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: Tue, 03 Aug 2021 23:41:32 -0000 On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 04:06:39PM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2021-06-17 at 10:19 -0500, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote: > > +#else > > + warning (0, "builtin %qs needs GLIBC (2.23 and newer) that exports hardware " > > + "capability bits", rs6000_builtin_info_x[(size_t) fcode].bifname); > > + > > This seems OK. > It appears to comply with the documentation at least :-) > "If GCC was configured to use a GLIBC before 2.23, the built-in > function __builtin_cpu_is always returns a 0 and the compiler > issues a warning." Yup. And we still (have to) support older glibc versions, since various distros ship with something older (2.23 is only 5 years old). Segher