This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Fix ppc{,64} nextafterl and fpclassifyl

From: Steven Munroe <munroesj at us dot ibm dot com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>, Glibc hackers <libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:08:54 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ppc{,64} nextafterl and fpclassifyl
References: <20070605155638.GO3081@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz>

Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Attached is a fixed version of nextafterl and fpclassifyl fixes Steven
> sent privately a few days ago, together with a couple of fixes on top
> of that from me.
>   

This looks good, tested on powerpc32-nofpu, powerpc32, and powerpc64.
Thanks again!
> I have used attached tester to test whether nextafterl works correctly,
> not sure if we want that in glibc testsuite (only tested on ppc/ppc64
> as it is ldbl-128ibm specific) or not, perhaps with smaller number of
> tests.  The 10 million iterations take ~ 70 seconds on my G5.
>
>   

Additional testing is clearly needed, but where would this fit into the
tree. It is only ppc? I though other platforms where at least looking at
ldbl-128ibm?

References:
- [PATCH] Fix ppc{,64} nextafterl and fpclassifyl
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]