https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #22 from Sergey Fedorov ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #19)
> Created attachment 53779 [details]
> introduce ppc_intrinsics.h for powerpc*-darwin.
>
> This takes the header from the GCC-4.x apple debt branch (as present in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #21 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #18)
> (In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #16)
> > For Darwin, PPC intrinsics already is there in Apple headers. Can it be
> > added into current GCC?
>
> If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #20 from Iain Sandoe ---
the patch above does not seek to answer questions on validity - it simply
publishes the same header that was made available in the darwin toolchains (so
will be neither better nor worse than that)>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #19 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 53779
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53779&action=edit
introduce ppc_intrinsics.h for powerpc*-darwin.
This takes the header from the GCC-4.x apple debt branch (as pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #18 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #16)
> For Darwin, PPC intrinsics already is there in Apple headers. Can it be
> added into current GCC?
If it is in the Apple headers already, why would you ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #17 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #16)
> For Darwin, PPC intrinsics already is there in Apple headers. Can it be
> added into current GCC?
There is a version of the header on the FSF Apple branch, whic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #16 from Sergey Fedorov ---
For Darwin, PPC intrinsics already is there in Apple headers. Can it be added
into current GCC?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vital.had at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #14 from Matt Emmerton ---
I'd like to thank everyone for the great discussion so far.
Here's a summary of where we are at this point.
1) sync intrinsics
Useful, but with caveats.
2) cache prefetch intrinsics
Implemented via __bui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
You cannot use that from intrinsics. But the target code can do similar of
course, whether or not asm syntax for this exists.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
If PowerPC back-end supported the "Flag Output Operands" part of GCC's
inline-asm, you could use that to do the correct thing. But sadly PowerPC does
not currently.
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Exten
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #11 from Matt Emmerton ---
> > > > The implementation of stwcx() and stdcx() need revision on PPC.
> > > > As I understand it, there is no need the mfocrf instruction nor the
> > > > mask-and-shift on result.
> > >
> > > How else wou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Matt Emmerton from comment #9)
> > > __sync()
> > > __isync()
> > > __lwsync()
> >
> > The sync intrinsics need to be tied to some other code. A volatile asm with
> > a "memory" clobber i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #9 from Matt Emmerton ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #6)
> (In reply to Matt Emmerton from comment #4)
> > The intrinsics that we would find useful, having used them as provided by
> > the IBM XL C/C++ compiler, are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #8 from Matt Emmerton ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > __lwarx()
> > __ldarx()
> > __stwcx()
> > __stdcx()
>
> Is there a reason why the __atomic_* builtins don't work?
There are places in our code where we do man
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> >the cntlz ones are not, for example
>
> :) It has been a long time since I touched this but I would not doubt I
> messed up this too.
It's nastiness in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Matt Emmerton from comment #4)
> The intrinsics that we would find useful, having used them as provided by
> the IBM XL C/C++ compiler, are the following:
>
> __sync()
> __isync()
> __lwsyn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #4 from Matt Emmerton ---
The intrinsics that we would find useful, having used them as provided by the
IBM XL C/C++ compiler, are the following:
__sync()
__isync()
__lwsync()
__dcbt()
__dcbtst()
__lwarx()
__ldarx()
__stwcx()
__std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Okay, I'll bite.
Which of the functions/macros in ppu_intrinsics.h would you find useful?
Have you checked whether the implementation is good for your purpose, or
if they even are correct (the cntlz one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #2 from Matt Emmerton ---
This appears to have packaging complications by vendors as well :(
On powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.0.0 this doesn't get installed.
On ppc64le-redhat-linux it does.
However, both of these cases would benefit from some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93177
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
ppu_intrinsics.h is installed for all powerpc* configs. Though to use it you
need to compile with -mcpu=cell :)
22 matches
Mail list logo
