This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] BZ #19590: Fixed build of shared objects that use libmvec.so functions
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Andrew Senkevich <andrew dot n dot senkevich at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:42:00 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] BZ #19590: Fixed build of shared objects that use libmvec.so functions
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMXFM3tML81iuKQMKRU-T4Fw0+=sYk0q_BNavMGagt21VcYvzQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOp7BF2avdWbGTbsxuYQV_rmXSxzDUAwz+nHK-GhWqPKJA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMXFM3sG90jn3Em-REfaqtj3OGAjh51OcO=yn1qHqJ4aStkPrg at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1602111641250 dot 29940 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3uxH=0DHnwikPjs2AobQ0kxOqKg+j=CuOWX=RLB_i8hxg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
> > The relevant thing to test is
> > whether building a program that directly calls the scalar functions, with
> > options such that the calls get vectorized, works (including with variant
> > options for e.g. LTO).
> But it looks more like compiler test, not library. Or do you mean some
It's a library test (that inclusion of the header and making function
calls works), not a compiler test.
> ABI test for vector functions?
No, what I suggest is entirely an API test (with variants for building a
shared library instead of an executable, etc. - probably built several
times with different vector instruction set options), not an ABI test.
Testing the interfaces in the way that a normal user program would use
them, i.e. via the normal math.h APIs in code that happens to be
Joseph S. Myers