This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] PPC64: First in the series of patches implementing POWER8 vector math.
- From: GT <tnggil at protonmail dot com>
- To: "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 02:16:16 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PPC64: First in the series of patches implementing POWER8 vector math.
- References: <7z03WSXwPIOYABvW1ZYzHobMOv90wBWKo-e0YptRFovFUpRnrSEGN-zv08kOe_fPJMFnHx1khbcfcfooubTStEAtMX96Q2U4cRVZOm_TZl8firstname.lastname@example.org> <alpine.DEB.email@example.com> <bP9cSHHU7t33kQuGpgbcCiszcjGQgzFwy6FpxoUcDV3cpfkeleUwmjx9BDvJexHALeLVfAgxLjo88pP8Sxyx7g4HyHDdrEnRO4rqKtXBU3kfirstname.lastname@example.org> <alpine.DEB.email@example.com>
- Reply-to: GT <tnggil at protonmail dot com>
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Friday, February 15, 2019 9:07 PM, Joseph Myers <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, GT wrote:
> > > > +#if defined _ARCH_PPC64 && defined FAST_MATH
> > >
> > > Is _ARCH_PPC64 correct here - what's the status of support (in the GNU
> > > toolchain, Linux kernel, etc.) for -mpowerpc64 with the 32-bit ABI (which
> > > also defines _ARCH_PPC64)?
> > To address the support issues raised, a solution would be to have
> > 'configure' verify that the compiler generates a valid executable. Then
> > _ARCH_PPC64 would be replaced here by a macro determined at
> > configuration time.
> Since installed headers need to work for all multilibs that might share a
> compiler and a set of headers, a configure-time test isn't suitable here.
> I think __powerpc64__ is the correct thing to test as an ABI conditional
> (as opposed to an instruction set conditional) - it's what
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/bits/wordsize.h uses.
Going by Table 5.1 of the 64-bit ELFV2 ABI, __powerpc64__does appear to be the right macro to test for. I will make that change.