On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 02:35:16PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 08:40:36PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > PR target/109067
> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.cc (create_complex_muldiv): Delete.
> > (init_float128_ieee): Delete code to switch complex multiply and divide
> > for long double.
> > (complex_multiply_builtin_code): New helper function.
> > (complex_divide_builtin_code): Likewise.
> > (rs6000_mangle_decl_assembler_name): Add support for mangling the name
> > of complex 128-bit multiply and divide built-in functions.
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/divic3-1.c
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "__divtc3" } } */
>
> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler {\m__divtc3\M} } } */
>
> It might well be that we can use a sloppier regexp here, but why would
> we do that? It is a good thing to use the \m and \M constraint escapes
> pretty much always.
The last time I posted the patch, you said:
| > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "bl __divtc3" } } */
|
| This name depends on what object format and ABI is in use (some have an
| extra leading underscore, or a dot, or whatever).
So the patch was an attempt to match the other cases.
> Similar for the other three testcases of course.
>
> This patch is okay for trunk, if you have tested it on all
> configurations (powerpc-linux, powerpc64-linux, powerpc64le-linux with
> and without default IEEE128 long double at least). Thank you!
>
> Does this need backports?
I think we will need backports for GCC 12. The issue exists in GCC 11, but I
don't think that GCC 11 can really work on systems with IEEE long double, since
a lot of the stuff to really finish up the support was not in GCC 11. I think
I tried dropping the patch into GCC 12, and it looks like something else may be
needed. I will look into it.
--
Michael Meissner, IBM
PO Box 98, Ayer, Massachusetts, USA, 01432
email: meiss...@linux.ibm.com
