[Pixman] [PATCH] vmx: Fix vector loads on ppc64le

Siarhei Siamashka siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com
Fri May 11 08:26:49 UTC 2018


On Thu, 10 May 2018 10:47:09 -0400
Adam Jackson <ajax at redhat.com> wrote:

> From: Dan HorĂ¡k <dan at danny.cz>
> 
> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1572540
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson <ajax at redhat.com>
> ---
>  pixman/pixman-vmx.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/pixman/pixman-vmx.c b/pixman/pixman-vmx.c
> index 41efdcf..52de37e 100644
> --- a/pixman/pixman-vmx.c
> +++ b/pixman/pixman-vmx.c
> @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@ do							  \
>  #define COMPUTE_SHIFT_MASKC(dest, source, mask)
>  
>  # define LOAD_VECTOR(source)				\
> -    v ## source = *((typeof(v ## source)*)source);
> +    v ## source = (typeof(v ## source))vec_xl(0, source);
>  
>  # define LOAD_VECTORS(dest, source)			\
>      LOAD_VECTOR(source);				\

Thanks!

Reviewed-by: Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com>


But can we have some sort of a commit message with a brief summary?
With some information about how the problem exhibited itself.

Also by following the bugzilla links, I can see that RedHat is
apparently not running the pixman test suite (or is ignoring
its results) when rebuilding packages with newer versions of GCC.
It took more than two months to debug the problem, which has
been originally reported at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1546693

That's an excellent example, demonstrating why the pixman test
suite exists in the first place and how it helps to ensure that
the end users are much less likely to encounter problems if
package maintainers are doing a proper job.

-- 
Best regards,
Siarhei Siamashka


More information about the Pixman mailing list