This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
RE: [PATCH 1/N] x86_64 vectorization support: vectorized math functions addition to Glibc
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "Zamyatin, Igor" <igor dot zamyatin at intel dot com>
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Andrew Senkevich <andrew dot n dot senkevich at gmail dot com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 23:55:35 +0000
- Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/N] x86_64 vectorization support: vectorized math functions addition to Glibc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMXFM3t=ppndDUBzHzSus7xyuF5hTaLFZ5b273jD39NtddSvsw at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409101549490 dot 12853 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B0235320F09D65 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <20140911210246 dot GN23797 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <87a9655rnu dot fsf at tassilo dot jf dot intel dot com> <20140912074251 dot GZ17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409121700030 dot 1118 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20140912170827 dot GE17454 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAMXFM3u5DM_W=iiVReBszH4TY4Wwf3Vm7d79chwdfD_J5tTz5A at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141112175149 dot GK5026 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1411121809000 dot 23958 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <0EFAB2BDD0F67E4FB6CCC8B9F87D756969C63403 at IRSMSX152 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com>
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, Zamyatin, Igor wrote:
> > An alternative to having a processor clause now would be having an ABI/API
> > document for OpenMP on x86_64 - agreed between implementations - that
> > specifies what vector versions of a function the standard pragma means are
> > available, and specifies that implementations must not generate calls to
> > versions not listed unless some non-standard pragma is used to declare
> > those other versions to be available (which would put off defining such a
> > non-standard pragma until there is a desire to have vector versions for
> > newer ISAs).
>
> We can prepare a document that describes what compiler (gcc 4.9 and
> gcc5) can generate (and of course make sure that we have all those
> versions in glibc) for x86_64 and put it somewhere on gcc.gnu.org (e.g.
> Release notes?) and, say, on glibc wiki. Will it be enough for now?
I'm thinking of a document that multiple implementations have accepted as
describing the intended semantics of the pragma as regard what function
versions may be assumed to be present, so that we can expect glibc using
that pragma in installed headers to work with future versions of multiple
compilers, rather than something GCC-specific.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com