Hi, on 2024/4/20 05:17, Carl Love wrote: > rs6000, Remove __builtin_vsx_xvcvspsxws built-in > > The built-in __builtin_vsx_xvcvspsxws is a duplicate of the vec_signed > built-in that is documented in the PVIPR. The __builtin_vsx_xvcvspsxws > built-in is not documented and there are no test cases for it. > > This patch removes the redundant built-in.
By revisiting the comments on the previous version: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/646723.html I wonder if it's intentional to keep the others, at least bifs __builtin_vsx_xvcvdpuxds_uns, __builtin_vsx_xvcvspuxws and __builtin_vsx_xvcvuxddp_uns looks removable, users can just uses the equivalent ones in PVIPR. And for the others, users can still use the PVIPR ones by considering endianness (controlling with endianness macros). BR, Kewen > > gcc/ChangeLog: > * config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def (__builtin_vsx_xvcvspsxws): > Remove built-in definition. > --- > gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > index 7c36976a089..c6d2ea1bc39 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-builtins.def > @@ -1709,9 +1709,6 @@ > const vsll __builtin_vsx_xvcvspsxds (vf); > XVCVSPSXDS vsx_xvcvspsxds {} > > - const vsi __builtin_vsx_xvcvspsxws (vf); > - XVCVSPSXWS vsx_fix_truncv4sfv4si2 {} > - > const vsll __builtin_vsx_xvcvspuxds (vf); > XVCVSPUXDS vsx_xvcvspuxds {} >
