This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: riscv: fmax/fmin sNaN fix
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:28:24 -0800
- Subject: Re: riscv: fmax/fmin sNaN fix
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 02/21/2018 04:24 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> "Carlos O'Donell" <email@example.com> writes:
>> Patch review includes review of the commit messages for factual accuracy.
> Please review the original changelog entry then ;-)
The ChangeLog entry is not the same as the commit message.
A detailed explanation should become the body of the commit message for your patch.
>> * sysdeps/riscv/rvd/s_fmax.c (__fmax): Handle sNaNs correctly.
>> * sysdeps/riscv/rvd/s_fmin.c (__fmin): Likewise.
>> * sysdeps/riscv/rvf/s_fmaxf.c (__fmaxf): Likewise.
>> * sysdeps/riscv/rvf/s_fminf.c (__fminf): Likewise.
> That's actually functional, and doesn't mention anything about specs,
> should be sufficient.
If there is a release out for RISC-V alrady, then this needs a bug number.
So a meaningful, but minimal commit message would be:
rsicv: Fix fmax/fmin sNaN issues (Bug XXXXX)
If any input to these functions is a sNaN then the result
should be sNaN, regardless of the input.
Which is fine.
You also have assumed consensus as a machine maintainer :-)