<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">The problems from my earlier mail still stand, even with trunk r245199.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">1) Various configure scripts (e.g. lame and others) try to check for intrinsics using fragments similar to the following:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">#include <xmmintrin.h></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">then running that through "clang -E". If preprocessing succeeds, the intrinsics are assumed to be available, otherwise they are not.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The changes in r239883 break this assumption. In my opinion, intrinsics headers should always cause a compilation error, when the specific intrinsics asked for are not available. Of course configure scripts can always be hacked up to cope, but this is really the wrong way around.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">2) When those configure scripts erroneously assume specific intrinsics are available, while they really are not, and the program attempts to use them, clang dies with a fatal backend error, for example:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">SplitVectorResult #0: 0x2bbd2f3c: v4f32 = llvm.x86.sse.sqrt.ps 0x2bbd53a8, 0x2bbd2ea0 [ORD=11] [ID=0]</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">fatal error: error in backend: Do not know how to split the result of this operator!</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This problem is reported in <a href="https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24335" class="">https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24335</a> .</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-Dimitry</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 18 Aug 2015, at 00:08, Eric Christopher <<a href="mailto:echristo@gmail.com" class="">echristo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">There is nothing broken about not having the include guards there, it's just not helpful. I'm working on the infrastructure for an error if you call a function from within an incompatible routine at the moment (without duplicating a lot of code it's actually a bit annoying), but there's nothing actually wrong with the code. It's just the same as basically saying asm("invalid_instruction") in a random function.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Any configure script that was depending on error conditions from this is already broken by gcc as well, and likely icc.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-eric</div></div><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="">On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 3:04 PM Dimitry Andric <<a href="mailto:dimitry@andric.com" class="">dimitry@andric.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class="">[Re-sending, used the old cfe-commits address by accident]</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Where is the other thread? This problem still exists, for both trunk and the upcoming 3.7.0 RC3. I'll try to submit a patch tomorrow to partially restore the include guards, so we won't have a broken release.</div></div><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-Dimitry</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 03 Aug 2015, at 18:48, Eric Christopher <<a href="mailto:echristo@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="">echristo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class=""></blockquote></div></div><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><br class="">
<br class="">
Where are the negative test cases? Diagnosing uses of these functions<br class="">
when they aren't valid is really important - it's a pretty serious<br class="">
regression if we don't.<br class=""></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Two threads, I'm going to take this in the other thread. :)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-eric</div><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">cfe-commits mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank" class="">cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu</a><br class=""><a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits" target="_blank" class="">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>