nemanjai added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/altivec.h:3055
+#ifdef __XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__
+/* vec_ctf */
----------------
jsji wrote:
> This only affects __VSX__ version right? If so, can we move `#ifdef
> __XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__` into `#ifdef __VSX__`？
> Or even better only into the part of affected types, eg: vector unsinged long
> long?
Sure, I'll make the non-vsx version unconditional on `__XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__`.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Headers/altivec.h:3065
+ (__b)),
\
+ vector unsigned long long
\
+ : (__builtin_vsx_xvcvuxdsp((vector unsigned long long)(__a)) *
\
----------------
jsji wrote:
> jsji wrote:
> > Can we also add comments about what is the major difference with and
> > without `__XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__` , for long term maintenance?
> > Can we also add comments about what is the major difference with and
> > without `__XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__` , for long term maintenance?
>
> I know they are in commit message, but I think comments in source code would
> be more helpful than in commit message. Thanks.
Will do.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/builtins-ppc-xlcompat.c:2
+// REQUIRES: powerpc-registered-target
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -target-feature +altivec -target-feature +vsx \
+ // RUN: -triple powerpc64-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm %s -o - \
----------------
cebowleratibm wrote:
> Suggest adding an explicit -mcpu.
I'm not sure that works with `cc1`. It would probably neeed to be something
like `-target-cpu`.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/builtins-ppc-xlcompat.c:6
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -target-feature +altivec -target-feature +vsx \
+ // RUN: -triple powerpc64le-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm %s -o - \
+// RUN: -D__XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__ | FileCheck %s
----------------
bmahjour wrote:
> [nit] remove extra space
Oops, I'll fix it.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/builtins-ppc-xlcompat.c:8
+// RUN: -D__XL_COMPAT_ALTIVEC__ | FileCheck %s
+#include <altivec.h>
+vector double vd = { 3.4e22, 1.8e-3 };
----------------
jsji wrote:
> Can we add a RUN line to test that novsx are not affected?
I don't think this is useful as that would be a duplicate of the tests in
`builtins-ppc-vsx.c`.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D101130/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D101130
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
