From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266327AbUHPS2f (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:28:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267856AbUHPS2f (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:28:35 -0400 Received: from mail.timesys.com ([65.117.135.102]:44044 "EHLO exchange.timesys.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266327AbUHPS2d (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:28:33 -0400 Message-ID: <4120FCD0.2090305@timesys.com> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:28:32 -0400 From: Greg Weeks User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Rini CC: Dan Malek , Kumar Gala , LKML , LinuxPPC-dev Development Subject: Re: [BUG] PPC math-emu multiply problem References: <4108F845.7080305@timesys.com> <85C49799-E168-11D8-B0AC-000393DBC2E8@freescale.com> <410A5F08.90103@timesys.com> <410A67EA.80705@timesys.com> <20040809165650.GA22109@smtp.west.cox.net> <6FBD1B21-EA2B-11D8-8382-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com> <20040809222328.GB22109@smtp.west.cox.net> <4120B055.8090503@timesys.com> <20040816144829.GC2377@smtp.west.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20040816144829.GC2377@smtp.west.cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2004 18:27:10.0203 (UTC) FILETIME=[A49D8CB0:01C483BE] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tom Rini wrote: >>The way I got the LSB tests to pass was to remove the round in the >>denormalised underflow case. This appears to match the hardware >>behavior. I've not looked at the PPC floating point model close enough >>to know if this is proper behavior. It is what the LSB tests are >>expecting and doesn't cause a failure in any of the other LSB tests. >> >> > >Have you guys run the LSB tests on some PPC with hw floating point (is >that what you mean by 'matches the hardware behavior' ?) to see if the >test also passes there as-is? And does anyone object to this patch? >Now that 2.6.8.1 is out I'm gonna start committing in a bunch of stuff >I've had queued up and see if I can get Linus to pull. Thanks. > > > I didn't run the entire LSB, just some of the math tests. I had an 8260 and the 8560 we found the problem on and also a normal x86 box. I think this is the correct fix. At least all of the LSB math tests pass now and the LTP float tests don't complain. Greg Weeks