Message ID | 1461593344.29088.25.camel@oc8801110288.ibm.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are > connected to the wrong expanders because of copy-paste issues. These > tend not to be used anyway because the vec_st interface is friendlier, > but we should clean this up. Is that ok? > 2016-04-25 Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > * rs6000-builtin.def: Correct pasto error for stxvd2x and stxvw4x > built-in functions. Hi Bill, Approved for trunk. Thanks! Segher
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Hi Segher, > > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are > connected to the wrong expanders because of copy-paste issues. These > tend not to be used anyway because the vec_st interface is friendlier, > but we should clean this up. Is that ok? Ok for 6.2 (i.e. after 6.1 is released), from what I can see, already 5.x has the same bug. Jakub
On Mon, 2016-04-25 at 17:06 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > Hi Segher, > > > > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > > gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are > > connected to the wrong expanders because of copy-paste issues. These > > tend not to be used anyway because the vec_st interface is friendlier, > > but we should clean this up. Is that ok? > > Ok for 6.2 (i.e. after 6.1 is released), from what I can see, already 5.x > has the same bug. Makes sense, thanks! Yes, 5.x and 4.9.x are both borked as well. Preparing backports for them also. Bill > > Jakub >
Hi Bill, On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are > connected to the wrong expanders because of copy-paste issues. These > tend not to be used anyway because the vec_st interface is friendlier, > but we should clean this up. Is that ok? This is fine for trunk, thanks! Segher
Index: gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def =================================================================== --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def (revision 235411) +++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def (working copy) @@ -1391,13 +1391,13 @@ BU_VSX_X (LXVW4X_V4SI, "lxvw4x_v4si", MEM) BU_VSX_X (LXVW4X_V8HI, "lxvw4x_v8hi", MEM) BU_VSX_X (LXVW4X_V16QI, "lxvw4x_v16qi", MEM) BU_VSX_X (STXSDX, "stxsdx", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVD2X_V1TI, "stxsdx_v1ti", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVD2X_V2DF, "stxsdx_v2df", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVD2X_V2DI, "stxsdx_v2di", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V4SF, "stxsdx_v4sf", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V4SI, "stxsdx_v4si", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V8HI, "stxsdx_v8hi", MEM) -BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V16QI, "stxsdx_v16qi", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVD2X_V1TI, "stxvd2x_v1ti", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVD2X_V2DF, "stxvd2x_v2df", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVD2X_V2DI, "stxvd2x_v2di", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V4SF, "stxvw4x_v4sf", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V4SI, "stxvw4x_v4si", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V8HI, "stxvw4x_v8hi", MEM) +BU_VSX_X (STXVW4X_V16QI, "stxvw4x_v16qi", MEM) BU_VSX_X (XSABSDP, "xsabsdp", CONST) BU_VSX_X (XSADDDP, "xsadddp", FP) BU_VSX_X (XSCMPODP, "xscmpodp", FP)