--- Comment #23 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-17 01:01 ---
Fixed on the 4.1 branch and trunk.
AFAIK nobody is planning to backport to the 4.0 branch, so I'm closing.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-01 22:36 ---
Subject: Bug 26483
Author: wilson
Date: Thu Jun 1 22:36:19 2006
New Revision: 114319
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114319
Log:
Fix broken denorm support.
PR libgcj/26483
* src/ia64/ffi.c
--- Comment #21 from konqueror at gmx dot de 2006-05-26 14:58 ---
Can this please get backportet to the 4.1 branch? This bug is still holding
back some Java stuff on Debian/ia64 from being working.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26483
--- Comment #18 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-12 22:10 ---
Subject: Bug 26483
Author: wilson
Date: Wed Apr 12 22:10:49 2006
New Revision: 112900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112900
Log:
Fix IA-64 problems with denorms getting clobbered by type
--- Comment #19 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-12 22:21 ---
IA-64. Mine.
--
wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-12 22:22 ---
Fixed on mainline. Testcase added to mainline. The fix should probably be
backported to one or more active release branches.
--
wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #16 from wilson at tuliptree dot org 2006-04-07 23:00 ---
Subject: Re: Wrong parsing of doubles when interpreted
on ia64
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 13:46, andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #15 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 20:46
--- Comment #17 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-07 23:04 ---
Subject: Bug 26483
Author: wilson
Date: Fri Apr 7 23:04:15 2006
New Revision: 112768
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112768
Log:
For PR 26483, IA-64 denorm failure due to unwanted rounding.
*
--- Comment #12 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 19:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=11207)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11207action=view)
reduced test case
I tried to reduce this to a C test case suitable for inclusion
in libffi. I've attached this.
--- Comment #13 from wilson at tuliptree dot org 2006-04-04 20:22 ---
Subject: Re: Wrong parsing of doubles when interpreted
on ia64
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 12:07, tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
I tried to reduce this to a C test case suitable for inclusion
in libffi.
--- Comment #14 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 20:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=11208)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11208action=view)
proposed testcase, based on float1.c
This reproduces the denorm failure for me with unpatched sources, and
--- Comment #15 from andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-04 20:46
---
Great, a libffi test case!
Would you mind adding a reference to the PR in the test case header and adjust
the 'int i' in main to 'unsigned int i'? If you feel ok with the test case then
please commit to trunk.
--- Comment #10 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-08 00:46 ---
I missed the denorm angle obviously. And the answer to the question about what
is different between native and interpreted execution would of course be
libffi, which took me far longer to remember than it should
--- Comment #11 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-08 00:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=10989)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10989action=view)
unfinished untested patch to fix stf_spill bug in ia64 libffi port
This is unfinished. It needs to be a bit
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-06 17:08 ---
You can read about the java programming language's requirements
for floating point here:
http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/typesValues.html#4.2.3
Relevant quote:
In particular, the Java
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-02-28 21:15 ---
Subject: Re: Wrong parsing of doubles when interpreted
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
The number 5e-324 exceeds the range of the (C language) double type. So the
It's (just) within
--- Comment #6 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-02-28 21:40 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
The number 5e-324 exceeds the range of the (C language) double type. So the
It's (just) within the range of denormal values for IEEE double precision.
5e-324 is already out of range. The
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-02-28 21:50 ---
Subject: Re: Wrong parsing of doubles when interpreted
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, schwab at suse dot de wrote:
--- Comment #6 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-02-28 21:40 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
--- Comment #8 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-02-28 22:02 ---
Yes, it's already too late here. :-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26483
--- Comment #1 from konqueror at gmx dot de 2006-02-27 16:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=10921)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10921action=view)
Testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26483
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-27 17:03 ---
Isn't this the 64bit issue with fdlibm?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26483
--- Comment #3 from konqueror at gmx dot de 2006-02-27 17:26 ---
I dont think so as the testcase works correctly on amd64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26483
--- Comment #4 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-28 03:25 ---
The number 5e-324 exceeds the range of the (C language) double type. So the
result you get will depend on how overflow is handled. If I use a number
within the range of double, it works fine. I don't know what
23 matches
Mail list logo
