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 13DA93858D28; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 15:14:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 13DA93858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass 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 33BFDa4E006392; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 10:13:36 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 33BFDa6m006391; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 10:13:36 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 10:13:35 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: "Kewen.Lin" Cc: guojiufu , dje.gcc@gmail.com, linkw@gcc.gnu.org, meissner@linux.ibm.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: update requires for powerpc/float128-cmp2-runnable.c Message-ID: <20230411151335.GB19790@gate.crashing.org> References: <20230410020941.2440885-1-guojiufu@linux.ibm.com> <11b29ca1-cd23-1a48-4ad8-3b472d38fd2f@linux.ibm.com> <71ed6f665ae2ed9678d8dc4ec0f620ce@linux.ibm.com> <13ec00da-587b-847d-c26b-98cf463f21ac@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <13ec00da-587b-847d-c26b-98cf463f21ac@linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 05:40:09PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: > on 2023/4/11 17:14, guojiufu wrote: > > Thanks for raising this concern. > > The behavior to check about bif on FLOAT128_HW and emit an error message for > > requirements on quad-precision is added in gcc12. This is why gcc12 fails to > > compile the case on -m32. > > > > Before gcc12, altivec_resolve_overloaded_builtin will return the overloaded > > result directly, and does not check more about the result function. > > Thanks for checking, I wonder which commit caused this behavior change and what's > the underlying justification? I know there is one new bif handling framework > introduced in gcc12, not sure the checking condition was changed together or by > a standalone commit. Anyway, apparently the conditions for the support of these > bifs are different on gcc-11 and gcc-12, I wonder why it changed. As mentioned > above, PR108758's c#1 said this case (bifs) work well on gcc-11, I suspected the > condition change was an overkill, that's why I asked. It almost certainly was an oversight. The new builtin framework changed so many things, there was bound to be some breakage to go with all the good things it brought. So what is the actual thing going wrong? QP insns work fine and are valid on all systems and environments, BE or LE, 32-bit or 64-bit. Of course you cannot use the "long double" type for those everywhere, but that is a very different thing. Segher