From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=nHQO=D2=arm.com=andre.simoesdiasvieira@sourceware.org>
Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B193858D20
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed,  9 Aug 2023 17:08:02 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 75B193858D20
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com
Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14])
	by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D751D75;
	Wed,  9 Aug 2023 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.57.77.218] (unknown [10.57.77.218])
	by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56E423F59C;
	Wed,  9 Aug 2023 10:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fec48120-c56d-3f3c-1ec9-ce44a29a8051@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 18:07:56 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aarch64: enable mixed-types for aarch64 simdclones
Content-Language: en-US
To: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
 Kyrylo Tkachov <Kyrylo.Tkachov@arm.com>, jakub@redhat.com,
 richard.sandiford@arm.com
References: <f21466af-ae65-2e1b-49c2-ababe6047be3@arm.com>
 <mpt4jl93izl.fsf@arm.com> <9322d3d7-5188-fd49-7902-74efa5d65da7@arm.com>
 <mpt1qgcw3y7.fsf@arm.com>
From: "Andre Vieira (lists)" <andre.simoesdiasvieira@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <mpt1qgcw3y7.fsf@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_NONE,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>



On 09/08/2023 17:55, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> "Andre Vieira (lists)" <andre.simoesdiasvieira@arm.com> writes:
>>
>> On 08/08/2023 11:51, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> "Andre Vieira (lists)" <andre.simoesdiasvieira@arm.com> writes:
>>
>>>>    	warning_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (node->decl), 0,
>>>> -		    "unsupported return type %qT for %<simd%> functions",
>>>> +		    "unsupported return type %qT for simd",
>>>>    		    ret_type);
>>>
>>> What's the reason for s/%<simd%> functions/simd/, in particular for
>>> dropping the quotes around simd?
>>
>> It's to align with i386's error message, this helps with testing as then
>> I can avoid having different tests for the same error.
>>
>> I asked Jakub which one he preferred, and he gave me an explanation why
>> the i386's one was preferable, ... but I didn't write it down unfortunately.
> 
> Jakub: do you remember what the reason was?  I don't mind dropping
> "function", but it feels weird to drop the quotes around "simd".
> Seems like, if we do that, there'll one day be a patch to add
> them back. :)

After some IRC scrolling, unfortunately my client doesn't have a fancy 
search :(

avieira> Andre Vieira
jakub: which one do you prefer?
1:59 PM
"unsupported argument type %qT for simd" (i386)
1:59 PM
  "unsupported argument type %qT for %<simd%> functions", (aarch64)
1:59 PM
Gonna change one to be the same as the other ...
2:04 PM
→ gaius joined  ⇐ lh_ideapad, egallager and jwakely_ quit
2:36 PM <jakub>
I'd just go with for simd; %<simd%> functions isn't an established term, 
it would be either %<declare simd%> functions, but we have also simd 
attribute...