From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 28 10:19:33 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC9516A4CE; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:19:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from VARK.MIT.EDU (VARK.MIT.EDU [18.95.3.179]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 429BA43D39; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:19:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from VARK.MIT.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by VARK.MIT.EDU (8.13.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j3SAGdf3015685; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:16:39 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by VARK.MIT.EDU (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j3SAGdd4015684; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:16:39 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:16:39 -0400 From: David Schultz To: Stefan Farfeleder Message-ID: <20050428101639.GA15653@VARK.MIT.EDU> Mail-Followup-To: Stefan Farfeleder , src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200504220830.j3M8UXSC030662@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050422084616.GB87979@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> <20050423132715.GA59057@VARK.MIT.EDU> <20050428090356.GB67414@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050428090356.GB67414@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/msun/src s_ceill.c s_floorl.c s_truncl.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:19:33 -0000 On Thu, Apr 28, 2005, Stefan Farfeleder wrote: > On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 09:27:15AM -0400, David Schultz wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2005, Stefan Farfeleder wrote: > > > > > Please ignore my last message, I'll just use double addition to generate > > > the exception. > > > > Couldn't that result in a spurious underflow when logn double x gets > > converted to double precision? Consider x = 0x1p-2000L. > > Indeed, that does happen. Should I back out the last change and leave > it broken on sparc64 until someone fixes the quad emulation? Yeah, I think so. There's no sense in having a hack to do things right in one case when the real problem is that things are broken for all the other cases, including addition.