Hi Carl,
on 2024/8/8 01:15, Carl Love wrote:
>
> GCC maintainers:
>
> The patch removed the built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp as it is covered by
> the overloaded vec_doubleo built-in.
>
> The patch has been tested on Power 10 LE and BE with no regressions.
>
> Please let me know if it is acceptable for mainline. Thanks.
>
> Carl
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> rs6000, Remove redundant built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp
>
> The built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp is a duplicate of the overloaded
> built-in vec_doubleo. There are no test cases or documentation for
I think this wording is wrong, __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp is a bif doing
1-1 map to xvcvuxwdp, but vec_doubleo with vector unsigned int is only
mapped to xvcvuxwdp on LE while it's vec_doublee on BE. So how about
"... __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp can be covered with PVIPR function
vec_doubleo on LE and vec_doublee on BE...".
OK with this wording tweaked, thanks!
BR,
Kewen
> __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp. This patch removes the redundant built-in.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> * config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def (__builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp):
> Remove built-in definition.
> ---
> gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def
> b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def
> index 8bb7686bcc8..f2bebd299b2 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def
> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def
> @@ -1613,9 +1613,6 @@
> const vf __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxdsp (vull);
> XVCVUXDSP vsx_xvcvuxdsp {}
>
> - const vd __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwdp (vsi);
> - XVCVUXWDP vsx_xvcvuxwdp {}
> -
> const vf __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxwsp (vsi);
> XVCVUXWSP vsx_floatunsv4siv4sf2 {}
>
