From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/11440 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390x: Add single instruction math functions Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:19:55 +0200 Message-ID: <20170611101955.GX9350@port70.net> References: <20170610153648.GT9350@port70.net> <20170610182950.GV9350@port70.net> <20170610194855.GS1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20170610212801.GW9350@port70.net> <20170611022044.GV1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1497176409 1223 195.159.176.226 (11 Jun 2017 10:20:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:20:09 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-11453-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Jun 11 12:20:05 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dJzyX-0008UP-1T for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:20:05 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 26496 invoked by uid 550); 11 Jun 2017 10:20:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 26475 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2017 10:20:06 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170611022044.GV1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:11440 Archived-At: * Rich Felker [2017-06-10 22:20:44 -0400]: > On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 05:48:05PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > > When I worked with Bobby Bingham to create the s390x port of Musl, I > > said that he could assume newer processors. Also, I don't believe > > that LLVM supports the earlier processors. I believe that he assumed > > some more recent instructions in other parts of the code. > > That seems doubtful; the amount of asm in musl is minimal and unlikely > to benefit from later ISA levels; all the instructions I see look like > very basic stuff that would always have been available. > > Now, what likely is accurate is your claim that nobody is using musl > on lower ISA levels, so maybe it doesn't matter. well i am using s390x musl with lower isa level for compile tests and it seems gas rejects unrecognized opcodes so the new inline asm does not compile for me. i think either musl configure should make sure the cc targets the right isa level or the code should handle it with ifdefs