public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
To: Tom Coldrick <thomas.coldrick@codethink.co.uk>,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] manual: Avoid name collision in libm ULP table [BZ #28956]
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:16:54 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dcb83c75-23d0-26a5-0c63-c4735c275dfa@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220405094654.111306-1-thomas.coldrick@codethink.co.uk>



On 05/04/2022 06:46, Tom Coldrick via Libc-alpha wrote:
> The 32-bit and 64-bit variants of RISC-V share the same name - "RISC-V"
> - when generating the libm error table for the info pages. This
> collision, and the way how the table is generated, mean that the values
> in the final table for "RISC-V" may be either for the 32- or 64-bit
> variant, with no indication as to which.
> 
> As an additional side-effect, this makes the build non-reproducible, as
> the error table generated is dependent upon the host filesystem
> implementation.
> 
> To solve this issue, the libm-test-ulps-name files for both variants
> have been modified to include their word size, so as to remove the
> collision and provide more accurate information in the table.
> 
> An alternative proposed was to merge the two variants' ULP values into a
> single file, but this would mean that information about error values is
> lost, as the two variants are not identical. Some differences are
> considerable, notably the values for the exp() function are large.

Path looks ok, but is there any expectation that RV64 and RV32 hardware
floating-point implementation or compiler generate code to have different
precision? Otherwise it would be simple to just use one ulp tests file.

> ---
>  sysdeps/riscv/rv32/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name | 2 +-
>  sysdeps/riscv/rv64/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sysdeps/riscv/rv32/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name b/sysdeps/riscv/rv32/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name
> index 827fcdca19..6d2816082e 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/riscv/rv32/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name
> +++ b/sysdeps/riscv/rv32/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -RISC-V
> +RISC-V 32-bit
> diff --git a/sysdeps/riscv/rv64/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name b/sysdeps/riscv/rv64/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name
> index 827fcdca19..9cb50380df 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/riscv/rv64/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name
> +++ b/sysdeps/riscv/rv64/rvd/libm-test-ulps-name
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -RISC-V
> +RISC-V 64-bit

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-05 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-05  9:46 Tom Coldrick
2022-04-05 11:16 ` Adhemerval Zanella [this message]
2022-04-11 15:46   ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-04-05 13:29 ` Florian Weimer
2022-04-05 15:25   ` Andreas Schwab

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=dcb83c75-23d0-26a5-0c63-c4735c275dfa@linaro.org \
    --to=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=thomas.coldrick@codethink.co.uk \
    /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: link
Be 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).