Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Fix for entries in table of overloaded built-in functions

[Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>]

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 for a given built-in definition will stop looking
> once it reaches the end of the initial block of definitions for that
> built-in function and subsequent definitions for that built-in will
> never be checked.  This issue currently occurs with the
> ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_PACKS and P8V_BUILTIN_VEC_VGBBD built-ins.  The
> patch simply moves the existing entries so the definition for a given
> built-in are all together in the same block of entries.

Do we need a separate testcase to check for this?  Or do those specific
builtins need better testcases?  Or was the bug obvious already?

> Note this issue also exists with the GCC-5 and GCC-6 branches.  
> 
> The patch has been tested on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu (Power 8 LE)
> with no regressions.
> 
> Is the patch OK for trunk?  

Yes, thanks!

> Assuming this patch is OK, would it be acceptable to post a back port of
> the patch for GCC 5 and GCC 6 branches after the patch is in mainline as
> long as no issues are seen with this version in the mainline code base?

Right; let it simmer on mainline for a while, and then it is approved
for backport (if it is the same patch; otherwise please post the version
of the patch you checked in to the branches).  Do send an email noting
you backported it to which branches.


Segher


> 2017-01-23  Carl Love  <cel@us.ibm.com>
> 
>         * config/rs6000/rs6000-c (altivec_overloaded_builtins): Fix order
>         of entries for ALTIVEC_BUILTIN_VEC_PACKS and P8V_BUILTIN_VEC_VGBBD.