On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 10:42:48PM +0000, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > In current beignet (commit 4caba11ce88b3c1ec80ee119ceaf4bf778b96471): > -pow/pown ignore the sign of their first argument (e.g. pow(-2,3) gives > 8 instead of -8) > -erf/erfc diverge (instead of converging to 1 or 0) for arguments above > about 2 > -tgamma is actually lgamma, a related but very different function > > The test suite doesn't detect these problems because the erf/erfc > and pow tests are disabled by default (in the case of pow, due to an > unrelated bug in the test), and the tgamma test checks it against > libc's gammaf, which is also lgamma, instead of tgammaf. > > My patch against 0.9.3, fixing all the above and re-enabling the > tests, is at > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=5;filename=Fix-pow-erf-tgamma.patch;att=3;bug=768090 > but will need some adjustment for HEAD (the relevant parts of > backend/src/ocl_stdlib.tmpl.h are now in > backend/src/libocl/tmpl/ocl_math.tmpl.cl). > > This patch contains LGPL2.1+ code from glibc ( > http://sources.debian.net/src/glibc/2.19-12/sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32/s_erff.c/ > ); is that permitted here? (Beignet's COPYING file is LGPL2.1 , the > project website says LGPL2+, and the file headers say "Lesser GPL > v2+" (2.1 was the first version to be called Lesser, rather than > Library, GPL).)
As to the license issue, we will fix it to a consistent version. I think change all statement to LGPL2.1+ should be ok. Is there any comments if we change to LGPL2.1+? Thanks, Zhigang Gong. > > _______________________________________________ > Beignet mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/beignet _______________________________________________ Beignet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/beignet
