From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EB57385840C for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:28:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 6EB57385840C Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-383-VcpsMhb0P5SoUVEnzskbVg-1; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:28:32 -0400 X-MC-Unique: VcpsMhb0P5SoUVEnzskbVg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD29D1C02326; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:28:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.15]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C2DC400E420; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:28:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 22UCSRXH167859 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:28:28 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 22UCSKHK167858; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:28:20 +0200 Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 14:28:20 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Segher Boessenkool , dje@gmail.com, bill.schmidt@fastmail.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: rs6000 patch ping^2: [PATCH 8/8] rs6000: Fix some missing built-in attributes [PR104004] Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.11.54.2 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, 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: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 12:28:38 -0000 On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 02:18:00PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:50:26AM -0600, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote: > > PR104004 caught some misses on my part in converting to the new built-in > > function infrastructure. In particular, I forgot to mark all of the "nosoft" > > built-ins, and one of those should also have been marked "no32bit". > > > > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu with no regressions. > > Is this okay for trunk? > > > > Thanks, > > Bill > > > > > > 2022-01-27 Bill Schmidt > > > > gcc/ > > * config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def (MFFSL): Mark nosoft. > > (MTFSB0): Likewise. > > (MTFSB1): Likewise. > > (SET_FPSCR_RN): Likewise. > > (SET_FPSCR_DRN): Mark nosoft and no32bit. > > This patch fixes a P1 regression and from my (limited) understanding > doesn't depend on any other patch in the series. > > Is this ok for trunk (I agree some testcase coverage would be nice)? I'd like to ping this again. > > diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > > index c8f0cf332eb..98619a649e3 100644 > > --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > > +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > > @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ > > ; processors, this builtin automatically falls back to mffs on older > > ; platforms. Thus it appears here in the [always] stanza. > > double __builtin_mffsl (); > > - MFFSL rs6000_mffsl {} > > + MFFSL rs6000_mffsl {nosoft} > > > > ; This is redundant with __builtin_pack_ibm128, as it requires long > > ; double to be __ibm128. Should probably be deprecated. > > @@ -226,10 +226,10 @@ > > MFTB rs6000_mftb_di {32bit} > > > > void __builtin_mtfsb0 (const int<0,31>); > > - MTFSB0 rs6000_mtfsb0 {} > > + MTFSB0 rs6000_mtfsb0 {nosoft} > > > > void __builtin_mtfsb1 (const int<0,31>); > > - MTFSB1 rs6000_mtfsb1 {} > > + MTFSB1 rs6000_mtfsb1 {nosoft} > > > > void __builtin_mtfsf (const int<0,255>, double); > > MTFSF rs6000_mtfsf {} > > @@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ > > PACK_IF packif {} > > > > void __builtin_set_fpscr_rn (const int[0,3]); > > - SET_FPSCR_RN rs6000_set_fpscr_rn {} > > + SET_FPSCR_RN rs6000_set_fpscr_rn {nosoft} > > > > const double __builtin_unpack_ibm128 (__ibm128, const int<0,1>); > > UNPACK_IF unpackif {} > > @@ -2969,7 +2969,7 @@ > > PACK_TD packtd {} > > > > void __builtin_set_fpscr_drn (const int[0,7]); > > - SET_FPSCR_DRN rs6000_set_fpscr_drn {} > > + SET_FPSCR_DRN rs6000_set_fpscr_drn {nosoft,no32bit} > > > > const unsigned long long __builtin_unpack_dec128 (_Decimal128, \ > > const int<0,1>); > > -- > > 2.27.0 > > Jakub Jakub