On Sat, Aug 23, 2025 at 11:56 PM Matteo Nicoli <matteo.nicoli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear reviewers, > > I attached a patch for bug 121595 > (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121595). I signed it, and added > `Reviewed-by: Andrew Pinski <andrew.pin...@oss.qualcomm.com>` (here in CC).
+/* fabs(x + 0.0) -> fabs(x), safe even with signed zeros when -fno-trapping-math. */ +(for op (plus minus) + (simplify + (abs (op @0 real_zerop@1)) + (if (!flag_trapping_math) + (abs @0)))) so forgive my ignorance, possibly IEEE abs() never raises FP exceptions (unless operating on sNaN?)? But does Inf + 0.0 raise FE_OVERFLOW? Does NaN + 0.0 raise FE_INVALID? So what I wonder is whether !HONOR_SNANS (@0) would be enough to check? I refrained from trusting AI on those questions ... Richard. > Best regards, > Matteo > >
