On 8/13/20 2:24 PM, Carl Love wrote:
Bill:
On Thu, 2020-08-13 at 13:38 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hi Carl,
Thanks for cleaning up the consistency issue. The new names and
related
adjustments LGTM.
Are there no affected test cases that need adjusting? That
surprises
me. For example, didn't __builtin_altivec_xxeval become
__builtin_vsx_xxeval as a result of this change? Does that not
appear
in any test cases?
Thanks,
Bill
In gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def we have
#define vec_ternarylogic(a, b, c, d) __builtin_vec_xxeval (a, b, c, d)
The vec_ternarylogic() builtin is used in test files
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/vec-ternarylogic-X.c where X stands
for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
In gcc/confit/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def
BU_P10V_VSX_4 (XXEVAL, "xxeval", CONST, xxeval)
now expands to __builtin_vsx_xxeval as you expect.
I do not see a test case that uses the old builtin name
__builtin_altivec_xxeval.
carll@genoa:~/GCC/gcc-mainline-935/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc$
grep -r xxeval *
vec-ternarylogic-0.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
vec-ternarylogic-2.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
vec-ternarylogic-3.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
vec-ternarylogic-4.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
vec-ternarylogic-6.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
vec-ternarylogic-8.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
vec-ternarylogic-9.c:/* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\mxxeval\M} } } */
carll@genoa:~/GCC/gcc-mainline-935/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc$
There just seems to be the various tests that are expected to generate
the xxeval instruction. As far as I can see there is no test program that uses
the __builtin_altivec_xxeval name.
OK, but that was just meant as an example. We have a fair number of
things that changed names, so I was somewhat surprised. It could be
that all of these are likewise hidden via the overload mechanism. Just
checking to be sure.
Thanks,
Bill
Carl
