stdarch
stdarch copied to clipboard
rust-lang
attempt to resolve #852
This PR introduces _MM_{GET,SET}_DENORMALS_ZERO_MODE, MM_DENORMALS_ZERO_ON, MM_DENORMALS_ZERO_OFF, MM_DENORMALS_ZERO_MASK. One remaining question is that in which file these should be placed? sse.rs or sse3.rs?
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @Amanieu (or someone else) soon.
_MM_{SET, GET}_DENORMALS_ZERO_MODE is not defined in Intel Intrinsics Guid but can be found in emmintrin.h of llvm, pmmintrin.h of gcc, and pmmintrin.h of Intel C++ Compiler.
LGTM! For the CI failure, you can add an exception in crates/stdarch-verify/tests/x86-intel.rs to ignore the check for this function.
This requires an FCP since it is adding a stable API.
@rfcbot fcp merge
Team member @Amanieu has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:
- [x] @Amanieu
- [ ] @BurntSushi
- [x] @dtolnay
- [ ] @joshtriplett
- [x] @m-ou-se
Concerns:
- unstable for a time (https://github.com/rust-lang/stdarch/pull/1377#issuecomment-1448663228)
Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!
See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.
:bell: This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. :bell:
psst @Amanieu, I wasn't able to add the final-comment-period label, please do so.
My understanding is that we should try to land new APIs as unstable, and only after some time has passed, then we can mark them stable.
@rfcbot concern unstable for a time
EDIT: Not sure why, but rfcbot doesn't seem to be registering my concern.
That's a good point.
@matthiascy Could you change your PR to make these functions unstable and open a tracking issue in rust-lang/rust?