From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from pippin.tausq.org (gandalf.tausq.org [64.81.244.94]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593114829 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:31:39 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:35:33 -0800 From: Randolph Chung To: Jim Hull Cc: 'John David Anglin' , parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Re: floating point exception error Message-ID: <20030110183533.GH26261@tausq.org> Reply-To: Randolph Chung References: <20030110075441.GD31470@tausq.org> <003101c2b8d3$477c8bb0$6763f40f@cup.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <003101c2b8d3$477c8bb0$6763f40f@cup.hp.com> 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: > What it does not explain is why the original message reported a > difference between a PA-8600 and a PA-8700. According to every internal > HP processor document and PA-RISC FP designer I've been able to track > down, this area of the design hasn't been changed since the original > PA-8000, so there shouldn't be any differences in behavior. actually it happens there too. i can reproduce the trap on pa8500, pa8600 and pa8700 A500s. so i guess this again points to a fp emulation bug in the kernel.... this is a bit surprising because aiui the code was lifted from hpux... will look at this some more this weekend. randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/