This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: PPC64 libmvec sincos/sincosf ABI
- From: Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom at ascii dot art dot br>
- To: GT <tnggil at protonmail dot com>, "libc-alpha\\\@sourceware.org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Cc: William J. Schmidt <wschmidt at linux dot ibm dot com>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, nd at arm dot com
- Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 18:17:05 -0300
- Subject: Re: PPC64 libmvec sincos/sincosf ABI
- References: <m-AhGqPevr7I_c5jF1posRA_bT8Gb8ybwyCgHJP5MbdPs1O6Yv60386A3hgYDZtEaij4iuLbqulf-JSlXj8v6mci_MNQDnHMd1mKpd1I0nI=@protonmail.com>
GT <tnggil@protonmail.com> writes:
> I believe PPC64 needs to implement functions analogous to x86_64 _ZGVbN4vvv_sincosf, _ZGVbN4vl4l4_sincosf, _ZGVbN2vvv_sincos, _ZGVbN2vl8l8_sincos.
I can't follow you here.
Why do you think both implementations for each type are necessary?
AFAIU, both _ZGVbN4vvv_sincosf and _ZGVbN2vvv_sincos should not exist.
Or are you implying they're required somewhere else?
> The function signatures of scalar sincosf and sincos are:
>
> sincosf (float, float *, float *)
> sincos (double, double *, double *)
>
> How do I determine the vector function signatures in C, of the 4 vector functions referenced at the top of this message?
For _ZGVbN4vl4l4_sincosf and _ZGVbN2vl8l8_sincos I'd write them as:
void sincosf (vector float, vector float *, vector float *);
void sincos (vector double, vector double *, vector double *);
--
Tulio Magno