Re: Are x86 builtin load functions "const"?

[Andrew Pinski]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 5:16 PM, H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Load builtins can't be const since they may return different values on
>  the same pointer value.

They should be pure though.

-- Pinski

Re: Are x86 builtin load functions "const"?

[H.J. Lu]

Load builtins can't be const since they may return different values on
the same pointer value.

H.J.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 1:19 PM, H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am combining most x86 SIMD builtins into bdesc_sse_args.
>  I only define store builtins with def_builtin. The rest will be
>  defined with def_builtin_const., including load builtins. I want
>  to make sure that it is OK to do so.
>
>  Thanks.
>
>  H.J.
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:47 PM, H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >  >  I noticed that x86 builtin load functions aren't defined
>  >  >  with def_builtin_const. Is this an oversight or intentional?
>  >
>  >  I don't see why they can't be defined as const, the only time I can
>  >  think of is when you have -fnon-call-exceptions turned on as they can
>  >  trap.
>  >  Why do you think this is wrong?
>  >
>  >  Thanks,
>  >  Andrew Pinski
>  >
>

Re: Are x86 builtin load functions "const"?

[H.J. Lu]

I am combining most x86 SIMD builtins into bdesc_sse_args.
I only define store builtins with def_builtin. The rest will be
defined with def_builtin_const., including load builtins. I want
to make sure that it is OK to do so.

Thanks.

H.J.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:47 PM, H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >  I noticed that x86 builtin load functions aren't defined
>  >  with def_builtin_const. Is this an oversight or intentional?
>
>  I don't see why they can't be defined as const, the only time I can
>  think of is when you have -fnon-call-exceptions turned on as they can
>  trap.
>  Why do you think this is wrong?
>
>  Thanks,
>  Andrew Pinski
>

Re: Are x86 builtin load functions "const"?

[Andrew Pinski]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:47 PM, H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  I noticed that x86 builtin load functions aren't defined
>  with def_builtin_const. Is this an oversight or intentional?

I don't see why they can't be defined as const, the only time I can
think of is when you have -fnon-call-exceptions turned on as they can
trap.
Why do you think this is wrong?

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski