Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 12:39:48 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Bruce Evans <bde@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/include _types.h Message-ID: <20080307122252.Y11033@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20080305230954.X55190@odysseus.silby.com> References: <200803051121.m25BLE03035426@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080305230954.X55190@odysseus.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Mike Silbersack wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Bruce Evans wrote: >> Change float_t and double_t to long double on i386. All floating point > > For those of us who are not floating point experts, can you explain a few > things? Other points replied to separately. > As I've said in the past, I'd really, really, really like to see regression > tests for any change to the floating point functions. The types of changes > you've been making are not easy to verify just by looking at diffs. I run local regression tests of 4 billon to 64 billion cases per function or 1.3 trillion cases for 125 functions a 36-hour run on a 2.2HGz UP system. These are not well organized enough for commit. You will have to trust that they are done before commit (or after on some other machines) :-). I mostly use semi-exhaustive (exhaustive for 1-arg float precision functions) checks on machine-generated args. This seems to find problems more routinely than smarter tests, up to at least double precision. das@ committed some smarter tests. OTOH, I barely tested the changes to float_t and double_t. These types are so rarely used that they are never used in /usr/src, at least in my old src tree, except for my uncommitted changes in libm parts. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080307122252.Y11033>