Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:45:43 -0700
From:      Stephen Paskaluk <stephen.paskaluk@gmail.com>
To:        "R. Tyler Ballance" <tyler@tamu.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Possible long double bug fix (Problem Report sparc64/55773)
Message-ID:  <d8623cc40412230645149a201@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1103799791.7216.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References:  <1103799791.7216.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 05:03:11 -0600, R. Tyler Ballance <tyler@tamu.edu> wrote:
> sap@ (of the MirOS project) has come up with a patch to fix this bug,
> which in my rudimentary testing on my Ultra2 seems to prove that it
> works.
> The .diff file can be found here:
> http://dero.tamu.edu/~tyler/code/freebsd/fpu_qp.diff

It's based partly on the OpenBSD version of the same code.  As a
general thought on the sparc64 fpu code, I don't see why there's a
need for the _QP_TTOQ macro at all, it only saves manually writing a
handful of functions.  It's true that you don't have to change each
function in the event of a change to the overall routine, but I don't
think that's much of an issue with this code.

-- 
Stephen Paskaluk



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d8623cc40412230645149a201>