Re: Fix for bz#13658 - using fsincos on x86-64

[Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>]

On Wednesday, March 07, 2012 14:51:34 Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> > So, the result has nothing to do with the expected result. The test
> > passes on x86-64.
> > 
> > I could add the testcase and the fix for x86-64 and not run it on i386
> > - or only run it on x86-64. What do you propose?
> 
> Is this failing on i386 with sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_sincos.S removed? 

In either case.

> Because I'd expect both x86-64 and i386 to need the same fix at the
> same time.
> 
> Actually it looks like s_sincos.c is using __sin and __cos - meaning
> that i386 would need s_sin.S and s_cos.S removed as well.  But I'd
> guess that sin and cos have the same problems for large inputs
> (insufficiently accurate range reduction) as sincos and so that making
> i386 follow x86-64 in using the generic dbl-64 versions of those
> functions would also be an improvement.

Yes, indeed. Let me check this...
 
> (Eventually all of sin, cos, tan, sincos should have testcases for large
> inputs covering all of float, double, long double - but that will need
> quite a few more fixes including ldbl-96 implementations of a few
> functions.  So I think we should get in the minimum that can be done
> incrementally, then follow up later with more fixes and tests for more
> functions, for more input formats.)

Yes - I guess I'll file a bug in bugzilla eventually for this,

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
    GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126