public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "dangelog at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org> To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug math/29193] sincos produces a different output than sin/cos Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 11:37:43 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-29193-131-QjGovEhrH0@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-29193-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29193 --- Comment #5 from Giuseppe D'Angelo <dangelog at gmail dot com> --- Hello, In a nutshell, there are a few things crossing each other: 1) `__sin_fma` returns slightly different results than `__sin_avx` or `__sin_sse2`. I don't think that this is a problem at all, but I might be wrong, I just lack the necessary knowledge about what glibc specifically promises here. 2) `sincos` seems to be consistent with `__sin_sse2`, and therefore inconsistent with `__sin_fma`. Is this inconsistency OK? Should it be documented? 3) In general, this opens the question: within the very same "environment" (same process, CPU, libm, fpenv, etc.), is there any guarantee that `sin(x)` always yields the very same result for identical values of `x`? Is `sin(x)` meant to be perfectly reproducible? If yes, should GCC stop turning pairs of `sin(x)` and `cos(x)` calls into one call to `sincos`? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-31 11:37 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-05-27 16:53 [Bug math/29193] New: " dangelog at gmail dot com 2022-05-27 19:33 ` [Bug math/29193] " schwab@linux-m68k.org 2022-05-27 20:05 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org 2022-05-27 22:50 ` dangelog at gmail dot com 2022-05-28 9:03 ` dangelog at gmail dot com 2022-05-31 11:37 ` dangelog at gmail dot com [this message] 2022-05-31 11:47 ` fweimer at redhat dot com 2022-06-01 8:32 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org 2022-06-02 9:29 ` dangelog at gmail dot com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-29193-131-QjGovEhrH0@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \ --cc=glibc-bugs@sourceware.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).