From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15767 invoked by alias); 15 May 2013 21:00:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 15743 invoked by uid 89); 15 May 2013 21:00:01 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 May 2013 21:00:00 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1Ucinl-0005HJ-EW from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Wed, 15 May 2013 13:59:57 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.106]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 15 May 2013 13:59:56 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Wed, 15 May 2013 21:59:54 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Ucinh-0000J1-O7; Wed, 15 May 2013 20:59:53 +0000 Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 21:00:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Carlos O'Donell CC: "libc-ports@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [COMMITTED] hppa: Update libm-test-ulps. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <5193B7DD.4090600@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00070.txt.bz2 On Wed, 15 May 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > It's not *new* here, but ulps for ceil, floor, rint, round, trunc indicate > you've got bugs in those functions for long double; they shouldn't have > any ulps at all. And the ulps for llrint, llround also shouldn't be > there, and include negative values, which should never happen even when > the functions are buggy. In fact, why are these tests being run for long double at all - why are there any long double ulps (presuming you truncated the file and regenerated from scratch, as you should at least once per release cycle)? You have long-double-fcts = no in your makefile. Contradicting that, you have #undef __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH in ports/sysdeps/hppa/fpu/bits/mathdef.h - if you really have long double same as double, that should be defined to 1, not undefined. I'm not sure the combination of long-double-fcts = no with #undef __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH is expected to do anything sensible. (However, I'd consider it inadvisable to fix the __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH definition before you've set up ABI test baselines for hppa and verified them against old binaries of old releases - that sort of change has significant risk of causing unintended changes to symbols in past ABI versions.) -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com