PING^3 [PATCH] rs6000: Remove builtin mask check from builtin_decl [PR102347]

["Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>]

Hi,

As the discussions and the testing result under the main thread, this
patch would be safe.

Ping for this:

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/580357.html

BR,
Kewen


>> on 2021/9/28 下午4:13, Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As the discussion in PR102347, currently builtin_decl is invoked so
>>> early, it's when making up the function_decl for builtin functions,
>>> at that time the rs6000_builtin_mask could be wrong for those
>>> builtins sitting in #pragma/attribute target functions, though it
>>> will be updated properly later when LTO processes all nodes.
>>>
>>> This patch is to align with the practice i386 port adopts, also
>>> align with r10-7462 by relaxing builtin mask checking in some places.
>>>
>>> Bootstrapped and regress-tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9 and
>>> powerpc64-linux-gnu P8.
>>>
>>> Is it ok for trunk?
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Kewen
>>> -----
>>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> 	PR target/102347
>>> 	* config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c (rs6000_builtin_decl): Remove builtin
>>> 	mask check.
>>>
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> 	PR target/102347
>>> 	* gcc.target/powerpc/pr102347.c: New test.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>  gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c             | 14 ++++----------
>>>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr102347.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr102347.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c
>>> index fd7f24da818..15e0e09c07d 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c
>>> @@ -13775,23 +13775,17 @@ rs6000_init_builtins (void)
>>>      }
>>>  }
>>>
>>> -/* Returns the rs6000 builtin decl for CODE.  */
>>> +/* Returns the rs6000 builtin decl for CODE.  Note that we don't check
>>> +   the builtin mask here since there could be some #pragma/attribute
>>> +   target functions and the rs6000_builtin_mask could be wrong when
>>> +   this checking happens, though it will be updated properly later.  */
>>>
>>>  tree
>>>  rs6000_builtin_decl (unsigned code, bool initialize_p ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>>>  {
>>> -  HOST_WIDE_INT fnmask;
>>> -
>>>    if (code >= RS6000_BUILTIN_COUNT)
>>>      return error_mark_node;
>>>
>>> -  fnmask = rs6000_builtin_info[code].mask;
>>> -  if ((fnmask & rs6000_builtin_mask) != fnmask)
>>> -    {
>>> -      rs6000_invalid_builtin ((enum rs6000_builtins)code);
>>> -      return error_mark_node;
>>> -    }
>>> -
>>>    return rs6000_builtin_decls[code];
>>>  }
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr102347.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr102347.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 00000000000..05c439a8dac
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr102347.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
>>> +/* { dg-do link } */
>>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target power10_ok } */
>>> +/* { dg-require-effective-target lto } */
>>> +/* { dg-options "-flto -mdejagnu-cpu=power9" } */
>>> +
>>> +/* Verify there are no error messages in LTO mode.  */
>>> +
>>> +#pragma GCC target "cpu=power10"
>>> +int main ()
>>> +{
>>> +  float *b;
>>> +  __vector_quad c;
>>> +  __builtin_mma_disassemble_acc (b, &c);
>>> +  return 0;
>>> +}
>>> --
>>> 2.27.0
>>>
>>