On Sat, 7 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> Joseph Myers wrote:
> > You should be looking at TS 18661-3 / C2x Annex F for sNaN handling;
>
> I'll do so as soon as GCC drops support for all C dialects before C2x!
>
> Unless you use a time machine and fix the POSIX and ISO C standards
> written
On 2021-08-07 14:32:32 +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> PLEASE DON'T STRIP ATTRIBUTION LINES: I did not write the following paragraph!
>
> >> > I don't know what the standard says about NaNs in this case, I seem to
> >> >
Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
PLEASE DON'T STRIP ATTRIBUTION LINES: I did not write the following paragraph!
>> > I don't know what the standard says about NaNs in this case, I seem to
>> > remember that arithmetic instructions typically produce QNaN when one
On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> > I don't know what the standard says about NaNs in this case, I seem to
> > remember that arithmetic instructions typically produce QNaN when one of
> > the inputs is a NaN, whether signaling or not.
>
>
Richard Biener wrote:
> On August 6, 2021 4:32:48 PM GMT+02:00, Stefan Kanthak
> wrote:
>>Michael Matz wrote:
>>> Btw, have you made speed measurements with your improvements?
>>
>>No.
[...]
>>If the constant happens to be present in L1 cache, it MAY load as fast
>>as an immediate.
>>BUT: on
On August 6, 2021 4:32:48 PM GMT+02:00, Stefan Kanthak
wrote:
>Michael Matz wrote:
>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>>
>>> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the spurios
>>> invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is
Hello,
On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> >> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the
> >> spurios invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is
> >> acceptable,
> >
> > This claim would need to be proven in the wild.
>
> I should have left the
Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 02:43:34PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
[...]
>> >> The whole idea behind these implementations is to get rid of loading
>> >>
Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
>> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the spurios
>> invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is acceptable,
>
> This claim would need to be proven in the wild.
I should have
Hello,
On Fri, 6 Aug 2021, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> For -ffast-math, where the sign of -0.0 is not handled and the spurios
> invalid floating-point exception for |argument| >= 2**63 is acceptable,
This claim would need to be proven in the wild. |argument| > 2**52 are
already integer, and
On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 02:43:34PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> >> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> >> >>
On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:47 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> >> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> >> >>
Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>>
>>
>> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>> >> .intel_syntax
>> >> .text
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 01:58:12PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>
>
> > On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> targeting AMD64 alias x86_64 with -O3, GCC 10.2.0 generates the
> >> following code (13 instructions
On 8/5/21 11:42 AM, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
Hi,
targeting AMD64 alias x86_64 with -O3, GCC 10.2.0 generates the
following code (13 instructions using 57 bytes, plus 4 quadwords
using 32 bytes) for __builtin_trunc() when -msse4.1
Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> targeting AMD64 alias x86_64 with -O3, GCC 10.2.0 generates the
>> following code (13 instructions using 57 bytes, plus 4 quadwords
>> using 32 bytes) for __builtin_trunc() when -msse4.1 is
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 11:44 AM Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > targeting AMD64 alias x86_64 with -O3, GCC 10.2.0 generates the
> > following code (13 instructions using 57 bytes, plus 4 quadwords
> > using 32 bytes) for
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 09:25:02AM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> targeting AMD64 alias x86_64 with -O3, GCC 10.2.0 generates the
> following code (13 instructions using 57 bytes, plus 4 quadwords
> using 32 bytes) for __builtin_trunc() when -msse4.1 is NOT given:
>
>
18 matches
Mail list logo
