Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] aarch64: Fix intrinsic availability [PR112108]

[Andrew Carlotti <andrew.carlotti@arm.com>]

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 05:15:03PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Andrew Carlotti <andrew.carlotti@arm.com> writes:
> > This series of patches fixes issues with some intrinsics being incorrectly
> > gated by global target options, instad of just using function-specific target
> > options.  These issues have been present since the +tme, +memtag and +ls64
> > intrinsics were introduced.
> >
> > Compared to the previous version, this series no longer adds feature checks to
> > the intrinsic expanders, and fixes various formatting issues pointed out by
> > Richard Sandiford.
> >
> > Additionally, the series now refactors the checking of TARGET_GENERAL_REGS_ONLY
> > in check_required_extensions.  This refactor is included as a new patch (1/5)
> > to make the diffs more readable.
> >
> >
> > Bootstrapped and regression tested on aarch64.  Ok to merge?
> 
> LGTM, thanks.  OK if there are no other comments before the weekend.
> 
> > Also, ok for backports to affected versions (with regression tests)?
> 
> Hmm, it seems a bit invasive.  And if the GCC 11 tag in the PR is
> anything to go by, it sounds like this is already unfixable behaviour
> in at least one release series.

I think the impact is minimal prior to FMV support, so backporting is less
important for older versions.  The series should backport cleanly to GCC 14,
but would have conflicts in earlier version, so I think it would be sensible to
backport to GCC 14 and not further.

> Let's see if anyone else has any opinions.
> 
> Richard