Re: [PATCH v2] New generic cosf

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Paul Clarke <pc@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> The same logic used in s_cosf.S version for x86 and powerpc
> is used to create a generic s_cosf.c, so there is no performance
> improvement in x86_64 and powerpc64.
>
> -- 8< --
> For s390, this is the improvement noted.
>
> Before patch:
>   "cosf": {
>    "": {
>     "duration": 1.00388e+10,
>     "iterations": 1.34624e+08,
>     "max": 1655.32,
>     "min": 4.243,
>     "mean": 74.5692
>    }
>   }
> After patch:
>   "cosf": {
>    "": {
>     "duration": 9.89888e+09,
>     "iterations": 4.63972e+08,
>     "max": 1089.59,
>     "min": 6.789,
>     "mean": 21.3351
>    }
>   }
>
> Tested on s390x, x86_64 and powerpc64le and powerpc32.
>
> I'll reply to this post with a diff with the latest generic s_sinf.c,
> since including it here could easily be confused with the patch body.

Please provide a diff against the latest generic s_sinf.c.

I assume both s_sinf.c and s_cosf.c use the same set of constant
tables.  We should share them instead of duplication.

-- 
H.J.