Bill:
> >
> > I don't see any tests for the two built-in entries in rs6000-c.c which the
> > patch moves, i.e.
> >
> > { P8V_BUILTIN_VEC_VGBBD, P8V_BUILTIN_VGBBD,
> >
> > RS6000_BT
On Tue, 2017-01-24 at 10:09 -0800, Carl E. Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-24 at 11:08 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 08:28:37AM -0800, Carl E. Love wrote:
> > > The following patch fixes an issue with the entries in the table of
> > > built-in functions. All of the ent
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:09:23AM -0800, Carl E. Love wrote:
> > Do we need a separate testcase to check for this? Or do those specific
> > builtins need better testcases? Or was the bug obvious already?
[ ... ]
> Once the bug for the ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_PACKS built-in was found, I
> wrote a p
On Tue, 2017-01-24 at 11:08 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 08:28:37AM -0800, Carl E. Love wrote:
> > The following patch fixes an issue with the entries in the table of
> > built-in functions. All of the entries for a given built-in, must occur
> > in the table as a sin
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 08:28:37AM -0800, Carl E. Love wrote:
> The following patch fixes an issue with the entries in the table of
> built-in functions. All of the entries for a given built-in, must occur
> in the table as a single block of entries. Otherwise the code that
> searches the table f
GCC maintainers:
The following patch fixes an issue with the entries in the table of
built-in functions. All of the entries for a given built-in, must occur
in the table as a single block of entries. Otherwise the code that
searches the table for a given built-in definition will stop looking
onc
