Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-19 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On 10/17/2016 09:29 PM, Andreas Krebbel1 wrote: >> Here is a patch implementing what I think has been discussed in this > thread. >> >> OK? > > Looks good to me. > > Uli, do you agree with that change for S/390 or would you rather see us > fixing the float_t type definition in Glibc? I had a

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-17 Thread Andreas Krebbel1
> Here is a patch implementing what I think has been discussed in this thread. > > OK? Looks good to me. Uli, do you agree with that change for S/390 or would you rather see us fixing the float_t type definition in Glibc? -Andreas-

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-14 Thread James Greenhalgh
Hi, On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 10:34:25AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > On 10/04/2016 03:42 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > > > >>> (b) Handling EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT like > >>> EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_FAST would accurately describe what the back

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-12 Thread Joseph Myers
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > Regarding (c) imagemagick is also affected (it wasn't really clear from > my last email). Since it is a widely used lib I think this counts as a > blocker. The ABI relevant MagickRealType depends on the size of float_t: I think distributions manage

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-12 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On 10/07/2016 03:11 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > >> wrt (c): float_t appears to be more widely used than I expected. But the >> only hits which might indicate potential ABI problems where in clucene >> and libassa. (I've scanned the header files of

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-07 Thread Joseph Myers
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > wrt (c): float_t appears to be more widely used than I expected. But the > only hits which might indicate potential ABI problems where in clucene > and libassa. (I've scanned the header files of about 25k Ubuntu source > packages). If it's two out

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-07 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On 10/04/2016 03:42 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 4 Oct 2016, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > >>> (b) Handling EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT like >>> EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_FAST would accurately describe what the back end >>> does. It would mean that the default FLT_EVAL_METHOD is 0, which is a

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-04 Thread Joseph Myers
On Tue, 4 Oct 2016, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > > (b) Handling EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT like > > EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_FAST would accurately describe what the back end > > does. It would mean that the default FLT_EVAL_METHOD is 0, which is a > > more accurate description of how the

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-04 Thread Andreas Krebbel
On 09/30/2016 07:57 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, Jeff Law wrote: > >> On 09/30/2016 11:34 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: >>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: >>> + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: + /*

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-10-03 Thread James Greenhalgh
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 05:57:45PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On 09/30/2016 11:34 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > > > > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: > > > > + case

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-09-30 Thread Joseph Myers
On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/30/2016 11:34 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: > > > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: > > > + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-09-30 Thread Jeff Law
On 09/30/2016 11:34 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we are + in a standards compliant mode, and the

Re: [Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-09-30 Thread Joseph Myers
On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: > + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we are > +in a standards compliant mode, and the implicit precision we > +provide can be

[Patch 3/11] Implement TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION for s390

2016-09-30 Thread James Greenhalgh
Hi, This patch ports the logic from s390's TARGET_FLT_EVAL_METHOD to the new target hook TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION. Patch tested by building an s390-none-linux toolchain and running s390.exp (without the ability to execute) with no regressions, and manually inspecting the output assembly code