This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [RFC] How to add vector math functions to Glibc
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Andrew Senkevich <andrew dot n dot senkevich at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 13:45:58 +0000
- Subject: Re: [RFC] How to add vector math functions to Glibc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMXFM3tjquzniXP1weqxSVFJyhXqsf2PHuyrrrmqp7K0ZzORqA at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409242011260 dot 7597 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3tqiqUNuSU2KXvAFM-QescX3+6xUO9=z5X0Ac6C9qJ7zg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOq7bZHb8R=opUzSmAMGWjLpX21mR=Sx96cuBph=TTtDXA at mail dot gmail dot com> <54246CB5 dot 7020908 at redhat dot com> <CAMe9rOoLmJ2jHWmERoB0M83WNKovJOgh0--Kquw9O86A1tPU0g at mail dot gmail dot com> <5424733D dot 6010305 at redhat dot com> <CAMe9rOpacze055qyBFzz3M-b-GNtXCqZzMmkScBL9a94zVj28g at mail dot gmail dot com> <54247FAB dot 6050002 at redhat dot com> <CAMXFM3v8narOLMHC5U=fvyTFWV6s4ZACN-UrAC4fAcUs9SOFfA at mail dot gmail dot com> <54257507 dot 9070508 at redhat dot com> <CAMXFM3vOLspQtHxgJfD_Emht480w2RMbiwnEH6A_LhoS-JZFag at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409301620020 dot 15186 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3sjjaAn5gudXq8TDL1xaDHhzc7k1SySFV-aX2H=648kRQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409301957420 dot 12188 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3uEeWO2te_cQfxUJN4+0F2ukhEgcKBnce4qziG09g=vvQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
> > In general, patch submissions should be minimal (subject to bisectability)
> > - if pieces can sensibly be separated out, they should be, and each piece
> > should be given a meaningful subject (which will be the summary line of
> > the git commit message) describing what that piece does. It's entirely
> > plausible there are people concerned about a change to build requirements
> > who aren't concerned about vector functions.
>
> Is it OK to send patch with such update, containing also deletion of
> configure checks about AVX2 support as well as according preprocessor
> directive for hiding AVX2 codes? May be something else need to be
> updated?
I advise keeping architecture-specific removal of configure checks
separate from architecture-independent increases in minimum versions.
The AVX2 checks appear to be compiler tests, not binutils tests, so they
could only be removed after an increase of minimum GCC version for
building glibc to 4.7. Again, discussion of minimum GCC versions
(architecture-independent) is best done in a separate thread that is
explicitly about that question and that question only, but I'm not sure if
there would be a consensus for 4.7 or only for 4.6 as new minimum version.
And removal of configure checks that are obsolete with the new minimum
version might still best be separate from the patch that actually
increases the minimum.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com