This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][GCC][PATCHv3] Improve fpclassify w.r.t IEEE like numbers in GIMPLE.
- From: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Tamar Christina <Tamar dot Christina at arm dot com>,Christophe Lyon <christophe dot lyon at linaro dot org>,Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de>,Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>,GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>,Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco dot Dijkstra at arm dot com>,Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>,nd <nd at arm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 20:23:11 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][PATCHv3] Improve fpclassify w.r.t IEEE like numbers in GIMPLE.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <VI1PR0801MB20313CD2538258D3AAA60F5DFF910@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701181703580.1980@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <VI1PR0801MB2031DC35E0B3ADDF40EB5A0AFF7E0@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701191439001.4255@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <VI1PR0801MB2031901A2466FC38A4610577FF7E0@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701191619270.12012@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <VI1PR0801MB20319A4433E724B869E8423BFF7E0@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701191819370.12012@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20170608103058.GA285@x4> <CAKdteOZ6T8OB-R7HHkUuWgoVrxA-D6rPnH1U3n=9VAU5h4W0eg@mail.gmail.com>,<VI1PR0801MB2031575376F996A705CE73C4FFC90@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <VI1PR0801MB2031411786EE5517959DA13DFFC90@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <E2E86FA4-2E97-454B-895D-BF405DB01DBC@suse.de> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1706081639520.15290@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On June 8, 2017 6:44:01 PM GMT+02:00, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> For a built-in this is generally valid. For plain isnan it depends
>on
>> what the standard says.
>>
>> You have to support taking the address of isnan anyway and thus
>> expanding to a library call in that case. Why doesn't that not work?
>
>In the case of isnan there is the Unix98 non-type-generic function, so
>it
>should definitely work to take the address of that function as declared
>in
>the system headers.
>
>For the DEF_GCC_BUILTIN type-generic functions there may not be any
>corresponding library function at all (as well as only being callable
>with
>the __builtin_* name).
I haven't followed the patches in detail but I would suggest to move the lowering somewhere to gimple-fold.c so that late discovered direct calls are also lowered.
Richard.