Re: [PATCH v0] PPC64: Attach SIMD attribute to cosf, sin, sinf function declarations.

[GT <tnggil at protonmail dot com>]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 3:19 PM, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom@ascii.art.br> wrote:

> GT tnggil@protonmail.com writes:
>
> > On Thursday, February 13, 2020 2:26 PM, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho tuliom@ascii.art.br wrote:
> > The commits whose abbreviated ids are c1782a410f, 1bd6ae3a5a, and 29d3adfe09.
> > Each of them introduces a test to ensure that feature(s) used in immediately preceding
> > patches are available on the system.
>
> OK.
>
> > My understanding is that by using git rebase, each of those 3 commits can be combined
> > with the earlier patch that should have had the feature tests initially. I am assuming that
> > it is ok to re-write history in branch tuliom/libmvec in this manner. If not so, then you
> > may dismiss the suggestion.
>
> I don't think these changes are necessary.
>
> > I wanted to use the same order of defines/undefines as the math-vector.h for x86-64 at:
> > sysdeps/x86/fpu/bits/
>
> I also don't think these files need to be identical.
>
> The patch LGTM if it adds the missing declarations.
>

Can I let the patch remain as is? Or should I send a new version with
only the missing declarations added? Meaning the new patch will not
reorder existing lines in the header?

Bert.