From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 107293 invoked by alias); 17 May 2016 16:43:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 107272 invoked by uid 89); 17 May 2016 16:43:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=opportunity X-HELO: e34.co.us.ibm.com X-IBM-Helo: d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: murphyp@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: joseph@codesourcery.com;libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] Refactor tst-strtod-round.c To: Joseph Myers References: <8968b370018788e6fb7d7249118faa96f2e2ba90.1463433827.git.murphyp@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <5bdcaff5-b5b1-2dc5-4801-63edbc3e2f81@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org From: "Paul E. Murphy" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 17:32:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16051716-0017-0000-0000-00002F3632D7 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg00345.txt.bz2 On 05/17/2016 11:14 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 17 May 2016, Paul E. Murphy wrote: > >>> So far this message has reached the libc-alpha list twice (you don't see >>> it twice in the archives because it has the same message-id each time). >>> I've seen this issue before with large messages coming to libc-alpha from >>> IBM (many duplicate copies of them arrive on the list), as if there is >>> some problem with IBM's mail server timing out before sourceware accepts >>> the message, or something like that. Please try to get that mail system >>> problem fixed. >> >> Ugh. Thanks for pointing that out. That is annoying. I'll try. > > It's *also* a good idea to omit large generated file changes from patch > postings, unless they are important for the review. (When constant > suffixes are eliminated from auto-libm-test-out - desirable for the same > reasons as for the present patch - that will rewrite the whole file - a > > 60MB diff - and you certainly don't want to send that to the list.) Admittedly, my cutoff for "too big" was still too big. Lesson learned. Anyhow, for those tests, we do have the opportunity to post-process the content as part of building the tests. In that (yet to be submitted to libc-alpha) patchset, I updated gen-libm-test.pl to strip C99 literal suffixes, then wrap them with a new macro named LIT() to apply the appropriate suffix depending on the type under test. With the exception of nexttoward and its long double second argument.