‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Friday, February 14, 2020 3:38 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 08:24:30PM +0000, GT wrote: > > > Function rs6000_simd_clone_adjust, even though it's body is empty, > > cannot simply be removed. I tried it. It resulted in ICE. In my > > view, leaving it empty is preferable to modifying other files > > unrelated to rs6000.c in order to avoid having a function whose > > body is empty. > > So shouldn't the callback set target attribute (on definitions) to "vsx"? > I did consider doing something similar to aarch64_simd_clone_adjust. But the reason Aarch64 has a new attribute aarch64_vector_pcs is that they implemented a modified function calling sequence for vector functions. PPC64 vector functions use the existing function calling sequence spelled out in the 64-bit ELFv2 ABI. So with no new attribute here, the function body ends up empty. Have I missed something crucial? Bert.
