From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pj1-x102b.google.com (mail-pj1-x102b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102b]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7517385841A for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:48:39 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org A7517385841A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-pj1-x102b.google.com with SMTP id r61-20020a17090a43c300b00212f4e9cccdso13971348pjg.5 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 06:48:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ayv7z81XoFqaFei4bNtPDNPon78J1pQdtQNZHiMJwVw=; b=H8gyMaUE0fKw9Y8IxL99GR4lw16wcPSihvpCvFV5ibjhUULd7f9y72PPxE6x9ZrGrI 9p6oTvI8TI6m+vK3uAEohhnNkdJsbJnJ0pSfGO8k2XMqEyLouXak22iXSV1o+j/1siw2 YwCwLgm/oGytIX87a9UNNnuYeS9FBLEcevn3gcQT1SqxICk4g6DvRe9oIIIjflZCiKII c3yEs2UqPlJ7uJGjC3jScbzjTzLapyQBxVojjphFBzmnAj3fAceT5G6SFNZkzk8l8Cjv ktowYwenLgrL7OhTG5koCG2DK2xTCgW0QS+1aRnTNl9yZhSTRrd2yhRztzS1ncvFvilx ReqQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ayv7z81XoFqaFei4bNtPDNPon78J1pQdtQNZHiMJwVw=; b=tMdyBjPsGqC99SCb70rk9pj64tJxKN1WbuWSfS4OHS05JAfS/G0gItrGy4CI1rIcmx 33VKw/cOayuOy3dY/8BokLk0qHbztzI6Zq7Utlor+U99jPr6wIajJfBuQD4sX1pupPbN SHLBM9BZMQlmCehSo4GgzWOOmXECuT33B75dtDtidYlKoBmigsghMGlb0dj7GtTqPASU aM/ib6sEBUH9I4IKvVuQkCZtx5fReozPaFbmShQOx3zntDObnnf9FKq7eGxVeSv0KnQN /AdbzDMBKTSZncbz4wzEclv4hmTIWVAj0bx8mxt3GF0xj6IA2CEAsfYaziTnPBGa5ZFn jK+w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmpUTqJ/DNjxgC3vfyJ7DV3HWGpljapR8QIhrl0LX8ux8+wu21d 25DhrLBy1tF9jXLjzzhcLV0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6ajMBsVRFpIt+u0rRDsVa3tsZ2FlXY+B1Jnvqyh6q82TIEhUNjB/hwA+YokQT4vcIOcHCAiw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:efc4:b0:176:a6c5:20c9 with SMTP id ja4-20020a170902efc400b00176a6c520c9mr14168395plb.57.1668437318457; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 06:48:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:681:8600:13d0::f0a? ([2601:681:8600:13d0::f0a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n2-20020a622702000000b0056bbeaa82b9sm6789731pfn.113.2022.11.14.06.48.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 14 Nov 2022 06:48:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <003dcbb8-f883-7304-5e43-b60ad43ecaa9@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 07:48:35 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH] [range-ops] Implement sqrt. Content-Language: en-US To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Aldy Hernandez , "Joseph S. Myers" , GCC patches , Andrew MacLeod References: <20221113200553.440728-1-aldyh@redhat.com> <6909e534-616b-035d-47fd-705a4e9fa86e@gmail.com> From: Jeff Law In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 11/14/22 07:35, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 07:30:18AM -0700, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote: >> To Jakub's concern.  I thought sqrt was treated like +-/* WRT accuracy >> requirements by IEEE.   ie, for any input there is a well defined answer for >> a confirming IEEE implementation.   In fact, getting to that .5ulp bound is >> a significant amount of the  cost for a NR or Goldschmidt (or hybrid) >> implementation if you've got a reasonable (say 12 or 14 bit) estimator and >> high performance fmacs. > That might be the case (except for the known libquadmath sqrtq case > PR105101 which fortunately is not a builtin). > But we'll need to ulps infrastructure for other functions anyway and > it would be nice to write a short testcase first that will test > sqrt{,f,l,f32,f64,f128} and can be easily adjusted to test other functions. > I'll try to cook something up tomorrow. Agreed we'll need it elsewhere, so no objection to building it out if it's not going to delay things for sqrt. Jeff