From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from systemhalted (CPE0080c82c70ca.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [24.112.224.149]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B38482E for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 09:12:05 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:12:15 -0500 From: Carlos O'Donell To: John David Anglin Cc: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org, tausq@debian.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] glibc 2.3.1 - It's alive! - patches Message-ID: <20021118161215.GE2729@systemhalted> References: <20021111211624.GC9704@systemhalted> <200211172154.gAHLseba018429@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200211172154.gAHLseba018429@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: > It occurred to me these might be a gcc problem on PA1 machines. These > machines don't have fneg and negation is currently implemented as the > product with -1. This may cause invalid operation to be set if the > value is a signaling NaN. > > A better way to do the negation is to toggle the sign bit but this is > inefficient as the value needs to be copied from a FPR to a GPR and > back again. > > A quick check would be to run the tests with "-mpa-risc-2-0" and see > if this makes any difference. > Interesting. I shall add this to my list of checks todo once I get glibc 2.3.1 out the door. Everything is setup, I'm just running into some package integration problems (e.g. failing to restart certain services causes the dpkg -i to fail). My todo includes: - Follow our discussion on delayed exceptions and try a few implementations of trap barriers - Examine if -1*NaN is causing failures in the fp glibc tests. - Implement atomic_add, echange_and_add, and compare and swap, which are required in atomicity.h - Make some progress implementing *context() calls in glibc (SAPDB needs them). - Take a closer look at our setjump/longjmp impementation (there were some fears that it was mildly broken) c.