This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v3] soft-fp: Add the lack of implementation for 128 bit self-contained.
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Zong Li <zongbox at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Zong Li <zong at andestech dot com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at dabbelt dot com>, <darius at bluespec dot com>, Andrew Waterman <andrew at sifive dot com>, <dj at redhat dot com>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Richard Henderson <rth7680 at gmail dot com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:07:38 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] soft-fp: Add the lack of implementation for 128 bit self-contained.
- References: <1532610973-22705-1-git-send-email-zong@andestech.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1807261340140.22154@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CA+ZOyajXF-ehHpywKgkT-iYBMCGgxf8=z3gS-oiPUwo=AJppuw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Zong Li wrote:
> Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> 於 2018年7月26日 週四 下午9:41寫道：
> >
> > When submitting a patch, please always include a description of the
> > testing done on that version of the patch. For example, if you tested
> > your 32-bit RISC-V port with this version of the patch and got clean math/
> > test results, then say so.
> >
> OK, I got it. Shall I submit next version of this patch?
*Once you have clean math test results for 32-bit RISC-V* (or if you
arrange for another configuration to use the new code for fmal / fmaf128
for testing purposes and get clean results there), yes, resubmit with an
updated proposed commit message that reflects those results. Until you
have such clean results, we can't have much confidence in the correctness
of the patch and so I don't think there's much point resubmitting unless
someone finds further problems with it based on reading the code.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com