From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.61]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BADC23858D35 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 08:53:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org BADC23858D35 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-216-dBQlXeZrN6uHaM_ublKdzQ-1; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 04:53:27 -0400 X-MC-Unique: dBQlXeZrN6uHaM_ublKdzQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B35C80183C; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 08:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-29.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.29]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A73E019D9E; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 08:53:25 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Paul Zimmermann Cc: Adhemerval Zanella , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: fix inaccuracy of j0f for x >= 2^127 when sin(x)+cos(x) is tiny (v3) References: <87wo2oxahr.fsf@igel.home> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:53:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Paul Zimmermann's message of "Thu, 30 Jul 2020 09:20:16 +0200") Message-ID: <87lfj1jse3.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 08:53:30 -0000 * Paul Zimmermann: > Dear Adhemerval, > > thank you again for your useful comments. > >> Does it require any ULP adjustment (at least on the architecture you >> tested it)? > > I reset to 0 the j0/float values in sysdeps/x86_64/fpu/libm-test-ulps, > then ran "make regen-ulps", and got: > > $ diff ../sysdeps/x86_64/fpu/libm-test-ulps /localdisk/zimmerma/glibc/build/math/NewUlps > 1315c1315 > < float: 0 > --- >> float: 8 > 1321c1321 > < float: 0 > --- >> float: 4 > 1327c1327 > < float: 0 > --- >> float: 5 > 1333c1333 > < float: 0 > --- >> float: 5 > > which were the original values except for j0_towardzero (it was 6). > However the same applies to "master", so this is independent from my change. > Anyway, I decreased the value from 6 to 5. I suggest to leave it at 6, other CPU variants may still need the 6 there. Thanks, Florian