Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 15:34:07 -0600 From: Arindum Mukerji <rmukerji@execpc.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>, Martin Cracauer <cracauer@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/include npx.h Message-ID: <20000310153407.A23244@earth.execpc.com> In-Reply-To: <20000310133936.B14279@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <200003101756.JAA90710@freefall.freebsd.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003102057080.79394-100000@salmon.nlsystems.com> <20000310133936.B14279@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Alfred Perlstein (bright@wintelcom.net) [000310 15:08]: > > On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Martin Cracauer wrote: > > > > > Log: > > > Change the default FPU control word so that exceptions for new > > > processes are now masked until set by fpsetmask(3). > > > > Is there any reason for doing this other than so we can emulate > linux's bog^H^H^H nifty ability to divide by zero? > > What's the point of this except to mask obvious programming error? > > I'd really like to see this backed out. > In my understanding, the point of this is to make FreeBSD comply with the IEEE 754-1985 Standard. In particular, one line in this standard (Section 7 para 1) states: "The default response to an exception shall be to proceed without a trap." Though I've only recently started tracking the FreeBSD project, and am of more of a SysV kernel background, this would be my best guess as to why this was probably done. -- Arindum To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000310153407.A23244>