Re: mpz reuse test takes too much time

2016-12-02 Thread Niels Möller
t...@gmplib.org (Torbjörn Granlund) writes: > Target operands which are not also input operands are now overwritten > with garbage via the CLOBBER macro. (It would make sense to do this in > almost every other GMP test file.) > > I split your gcdext check macros into 2-operand and 3-operand

Re: mpz_gcd_ext(NULL, ...)

2016-12-02 Thread Marc Glisse
On Sat, 3 Dec 2016, Marco Bodrato wrote: The modified manual now says that "If @var{s}, @var{t} or @var{g} is @code{NULL} then that value is not computed.", but g is computed anyway, even if it is not returned... The only change is that it is about g, s and t instead of just t. But that was

Re: mpz reuse test takes too much time

2016-12-02 Thread Marco Bodrato
Ciao, Il Ven, 2 Dicembre 2016 11:50 pm, Torbjörn Granlund ha scritto: > Target operands which are not also input operands are now overwritten > with garbage via the CLOBBER macro. (It would make sense to do this in > almost every other GMP test file.) I like the macro. > I split your gcdext

Re: mpz_gcd_ext(NULL, ...)

2016-12-02 Thread Marco Bodrato
Ciao, Il Ven, 25 Novembre 2016 2:11 pm, Marc Glisse ha scritto: > On Fri, 25 Nov 2016, Niels Möller wrote: > >> Marc Glisse writes: >>> a user was asking if we could support calling mpz_gcd_ext with a NULL >>> first argument (the gcd), since they are only interested in the

Re: mpz reuse test takes too much time

2016-12-02 Thread Torbjörn Granlund
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes: > Shouldn't res1, res2, res3 be overwritten with some fixed garbage when > they are not also input operands? This remains to do, as well as updating the corresponding mini-gmp test. I made additional changes. Target operands which are not

Re: mpz reuse test takes too much time

2016-12-02 Thread Niels Möller
t...@gmplib.org (Torbjörn Granlund) writes: > Please check code spacing and . vs , in comments. Done and checked in. > Shouldn't res1, res2, res3 be overwritten with some fixed garbage when > they are not also input operands? This remains to do, as well as updating the corresponding mini-gmp

Re: Changes for GMP 6.1.2

2016-12-02 Thread Torbjörn Granlund
"Marco Bodrato" writes: I hope I did it correctly. The testing run from last night seems happy. I needed to make fairly large changes to the configure stuff for arm since the old code caused problems for several CPUs. I merged the needed changes from the head

Re: Aw: Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

2016-12-02 Thread Vincent Lefevre
On 2016-12-02 12:18:25 +0100, Wolf Lammen wrote: > Gesendet: Freitag, 02. Dezember 2016 um 01:30 Uhr > Von: "Vincent Lefevre" > An: "Nelson H. F. Beebe" > Cc: gmp-devel@gmplib.org > Betreff: Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp [...] > > I'm not talking about a

Aw: Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

2016-12-02 Thread Wolf Lammen
Gesendet: Freitag, 02. Dezember 2016 um 01:30 Uhr Von: "Vincent Lefevre" An: "Nelson H. F. Beebe" Cc: gmp-devel@gmplib.org Betreff: Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp On 2016-12-01 16:42:39 -0700, Nelson H. F. Beebe wrote: > Vincent Lefevre

Re: Help stabilising mini-gmp

2016-12-02 Thread Nelson H. F. Beebe
Vincent clarifies about my response on about zero shift counts: >> ... >> I'm not talking about a zero shift count, but a shift of the value 0 >> with an arbitrary shift count, e.g. (uint64_t) 0 << 64. This is >> undefined behavior, but I wonder why. When mapped to a hardware >> instruction, does