There are two test case updates for very basic testing. While I was editing cxx-altivec.cpp I also updated it to better match some other changes in altivec.c.
Note: "vector bool long" was not also added because its use is considered deprecated.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D7235
llvm-svn: 231118
Now that we have initial support for VSX, we can begin adding
intrinsics for programmer access to VSX instructions. This patch
performs the necessary enablement in the front end, and tests it by
implementing intrinsics for minimum and maximum using the vector
double data type.
The main change in the front end is to no longer disallow "vector" and
"double" in the same declaration (lib/Sema/DeclSpec.cpp), but "vector"
and "long double" must still be disallowed. The new intrinsics are
accessed via vec_max and vec_min with changes in
lib/Headers/altivec.h. Note that for v4f32, we already access
corresponding VMX builtins, but with VSX enabled we should use the
forms that allow all 64 vector registers.
The new built-ins are defined in include/clang/Basic/BuiltinsPPC.def.
I've added a new test in test/CodeGen/builtins-ppc-vsx.c that is
similar to, but much smaller than, builtins-ppc-altivec.c. This
allows us to test VSX IR generation without duplicating CHECK lines
for the existing bazillion Altivec tests.
Since vector double is now legal when VSX is available, I've modified
the error message, and changed where we test for it and for vector
long double, since the target machine isn't visible in the old place.
This serendipitously removed a not-pertinent warning about 'long'
being deprecated when used with 'vector', when "vector long double" is
encountered and we just want to issue an error. The existing tests
test/Parser/altivec.c and test/Parser/cxx-altivec.cpp have been
updated accordingly, and I've added test/Parser/vsx.c to verify that
"vector double" is now legitimate with VSX enabled.
There is a companion patch for LLVM.
llvm-svn: 220989
__vector long is deprecated, but __vector long long is not. As a result, we
cannot check for __vector long (to issue the deprecation warning) as we parse
the type because we need to know how many 'long's we have first.
DeclSpec::Finish seems like a more-appropriate place to perform the check
(which places it with several other similar Altivec vector checks).
Fixes PR20720.
llvm-svn: 216342
There are several Altivec tests that formerly ran only on big-endian
targets (and in some cases only on 32-bit targets). It is useful to
verify these on little-endian targets as well.
While testing these, I discovered a typo in <altivec.h>. This is also
fixed by this patch.
llvm-svn: 210928
We never aka vector types because our attributed syntax for it is less
comprehensible than the typedefs. This leaves the user in the dark when
the typedef isn't named that well.
Example:
v2s v; v4f w;
w = v;
The naming in this cases isn't even that bad, but the error we give is
useless without looking up the actual typedefs.
t.c:6:5: error: assigning to 'v4f' from incompatible type 'v2s'
Now:
t.c:6:5: error: assigning to 'v4f' (vector of 4 'float' values) from
incompatible type 'v2s' (vector of 2 'int' values)
We do this for all diagnostics that print a vector type.
llvm-svn: 207267
It doesn't make any sense to accept "..." in the argument to a C-style cast,
so use a separate expression list parsing routine which rejects it. PR16874.
llvm-svn: 188330
diagnostic message are compared. If either is a substring of the other, then
no error is given. This gives rise to an unexpected case:
// expect-error{{candidate function has different number of parameters}}
will match the following error messages from Clang:
candidate function has different number of parameters (expected 1 but has 2)
candidate function has different number of parameters
It will also match these other error messages:
candidate function
function has different number of parameters
number of parameters
This patch will change so that the verification string must be a substring of
the diagnostic message before accepting. Also, all the failing tests from this
change have been corrected. Some stats from this cleanup:
87 - removed extra spaces around verification strings
70 - wording updates to diagnostics
40 - extra leading or trailing characters (typos, unmatched parens or quotes)
35 - diagnostic level was included (error:, warning:, or note:)
18 - flag name put in the warning (-Wprotocol)
llvm-svn: 146619
of buildbots with:
error: 'error' diagnostics expected but not seen:
Line 9: too few elements in vector initialization (expected 8 elements, have 2)
1 warning and 1 error generated.
llvm-svn: 101864
destination type for initialization, assignment, parameter-passing,
etc. The main issue fixed here is that we used rather confusing
wording for diagnostics such as
t.c:2:9: warning: initializing 'char const [2]' discards qualifiers,
expected 'char *' [-pedantic]
char *name = __func__;
^ ~~~~~~~~
We're not initializing a 'char const [2]', we're initializing a 'char
*' with an expression of type 'char const [2]'. Similar problems
existed for other diagnostics in this area, so I've normalized them all
with more precise descriptive text to say what we're
initializing/converting/assigning/etc. from and to. The warning for
the code above is now:
t.c:2:9: warning: initializing 'char *' from an expression of type
'char const [2]' discards qualifiers [-pedantic]
char *name = __func__;
^ ~~~~~~~~
Fixes <rdar://problem/7447179>.
llvm-svn: 100832
Kit Barton