Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

> On Jun 27, 2016, at 12:41 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: > > Joseph Myers writes: >> On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: >>> The fact that I hook this built-in directly to a pattern named infkf1 >>> doesn't seem to preclude anything

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

Joseph Myers writes: > On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: >> The fact that I hook this built-in directly to a pattern named infkf1 >> doesn't seem to preclude anything you suggest. I named it this way >> on the off-chance that inf1 becomes a standard pattern in the

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

> On Jun 22, 2016, at 8:10 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote: > >> On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:27 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: >> >> (b) for trunk, having an insn pattern infkf1 for a built-in function that >> loads a constant is not appropriate (other insn

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: > I understand that this is what we want for GCC 7. My current concern is to > get my patch included in GCC 6.2, where I can't be polluting common code. > To get it accepted there, I first need this code approved in mainline. So I > am quite willing to

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

> On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:27 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: > >> Hi Joseph, >> >> That's indeed preferable for the long term -- given how close we are to the >> cutoff for 6.2, though, I'm worried about adding any new dependencies

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Hi Joseph, > > That's indeed preferable for the long term -- given how close we are to the > cutoff for 6.2, though, I'm worried about adding any new dependencies for > getting this upstream. I'd suggest that we go ahead with reviewing this > patch

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

Hi Joseph, That's indeed preferable for the long term -- given how close we are to the cutoff for 6.2, though, I'm worried about adding any new dependencies for getting this upstream. I'd suggest that we go ahead with reviewing this patch in the short term, and I'll be happy to work with you

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu with no > regressions. All new tests pass except for the test for vspltish in > the infinity test; this relies on a patch in progress to fix things so we > generate that instead of an inferior

[PATCH, rs6000] Add minimum __float128 built-in support required for glibc

Hi, This patch implements built-ins to support __float128 on 64-bit PowerPC. This is a minimum set of built-ins required for use by glibc. The following six built-ins are supported: __builtin_absf128 __builtin_copysignf128 __builtin_huge_valf128 __builtin_inff128 __builtin_nanf128