[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170624005539.GT1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:55:39 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc64le: Add single instruction math functions
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 07:46:38PM -0500, A. Wilcox wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 23/06/17 14:53, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:53:13AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >>> The following two patches are a start at single instruction
> >>> math functions for PowerPC64 architecture. Although PPC64LE
> >>> Linux and ELFv2 ABI require Power8 as the minimum
> >>> architecture, I have added guards that fallback to C code for
> >>> earlier architectures.
> >>
> >> Indeed, musl uses the ELFv2 ABI (minus its gratuitous mandate of
> >> minimum ISA level) for both little and big endian powerpc64,
> >> and I think we have users of both (people running it on old
> >> powerbooks, etc.).
> >>
> >> Am I reading correctly that sqrt, fma, and fabs are available
> >> even in the lowest powerpc64 ISA, and don't need preprocessor
> >> conditionals?
> >
> > fabs and fma are part of the base ISA for Power processors that
> > include floating point support. fsqrt originally was optional
> > feature in the distant past (General Purpose group of optional
> > instructions), but is required in the ISA for Power processors.
> >
> > Thanks, David
> >
>
> Chiming in as one of the heavy users/developers involved with musl/ppc.
>
> I can confirm FSQRT exists on the oldest PPC64 chip I have - a 970FX
> from 2003 - but it is indeed optional. (I didn't bother checking the
> actual IBM chips because they're all on the higher end.) The Linux
> kernel actually has support for emulating the instruction on PowerPC
> chips where it wasn't implemented. See arch/powerpc/math-emu/fsqrt.c
> in the kernel tree.
>
> It depends on CONFIG_MATH_EMULATION_HW_UNIMPLEMENTED (or
> CONFIG_MATH_EMULATION_FULL), but most (all?) distros that ship PPC
> kernels have that knob turned on, as far as I can tell.
>
> So this should be safe. The worst case scenario is that distros would
> need to twiddle a config knob in the kernel.
>
> All the best,
Thanks for the feedback. If it ends up being problematic, but gcc has
a way to tell if -march is for a model with or without it, please feel
free to submit a patch to make the use conditional.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
