From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40589)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1aB1yH-000718-Ao
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:01:58 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1aB1yD-0006Ww-Tn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:01:57 -0500
Received: from mail-qg0-x236.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c04::236]:35550)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1aB1yD-0006W9-On
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 10:01:53 -0500
Received: by mail-qg0-x236.google.com with SMTP id o11so31309238qge.2
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 07:01:52 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
References: <56698865.8050901@emindsoft.com.cn>
	<566988EA.109@emindsoft.com.cn> <5669B333.1080405@twiddle.net>
	<5669F94B.8060209@emindsoft.com.cn> <5676C98C.4040101@emindsoft.com.cn>
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Message-ID: <5678145A.2030408@twiddle.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 07:01:46 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5676C98C.4040101@emindsoft.com.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/4] target-tilegx: Add single floating
 point implementation
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Chen Gang <chengang@emindsoft.com.cn>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com>
Cc: chenwei@emindsoft.com.cn, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 12/20/2015 07:30 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
> And we have to still check TILEGX_F_CALC_CVT, for they are really two
> different format: TILEGX_F_CALC_CVT has no HBIT, but TILEGX_F_CALC_NCVT
> has HBIT (which we need process it specially).

The both do, in that you re-normalize to produce that HBIT.
That's the whole point.


r~