[PATCH v2 4/6] x86-64: Add vector log/logf to libmvec microbenchmark
Joseph Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
Tue Nov 16 00:12:28 GMT 2021
On Fri, 12 Nov 2021, Sunil Pandey via Libc-alpha wrote:
> Can you please provide some suggestions on input range, if it looks OK or
> it should be changed to some specific value to make it fair for different
> implementations.
>
> cos/cosf: Random inputs in [a=-100.00,b=100.00]
> sin/sinf: Random inputs in [a=-100.00,b=100.00]
My guess is that most inputs are actually in say [-10, 10], but [-100,
100] seems reasonable as limits on what values are benchmarked at all.
> exp/expf: Random inputs in [a=-10.00,b=50.00]
I suggest a roughly symmetric range (lower limit being a bit above what
would cause a subnormal result, upper limit being a bit below what would
overflow - note that means different limits for exp and expf).
> log/logf: Random inputs in [a=1.10,b=100.00]
I suggest a lower limit of 0 and an upper limit of FLT_MAX / DBL_MAX (note
this means different limits for log and logf), but with a substantial
proportion of inputs being closer to 1 (say in the range [0.01, 100]).
> pow/powf: Random inputs in [a=0.01,b=100.00], [c=0.01,d=10.00]
I think negative exponents should be included, about as many as positive
exponents (similar range, so that results are neither subnormal nor
overflowing).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list