This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Aarch64: Add simd exp/expf functions


On 07/03/2019 19:04, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
>> On the other hand, it could help to get libmvec out of the door more
>> quickly.  I think it's not ideal that if you use an older compiler,
>> you get only a subset of the glibc ABI.  We can get away with it here
>> because it affects an entire soname.  Still it might be difficult to
>> explain why applications are not portable.
> 
> On the whole I think I agree with Rich Felker's argument 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-11/msg00184.html> against 
> having the presence of libmvec depend on the tools used for the build.  
> (Note that the installed bits/math-vector.h file, which may be shared 
> between multilibs, does not depend on the tools used, so if libmvec was 
> disabled then the installed bits/math-vector.h is not actually correct and 
> some programs will fail to build.)
> 
> This is an argument for removing the --disable-mathvec configure option as 
> well as either having assembly wrappers or a requirement for new-enough 
> tool versions for building libmvec functions on platforms where the oldest 
> supported GCC / binutils aren't new enough.

so is it acceptable to submit generated asm to the
source tree together with the c source?

(or even object files if the assembler is not new
enough?)



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]