From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54301) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fIGGJ-00016G-HD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 May 2018 12:23:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fIGGG-0003eA-V9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 May 2018 12:23:47 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c05::244]:41940) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fIGGG-0003dX-Mj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 May 2018 12:23:44 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-x244.google.com with SMTP id w4-v6so4066658pgq.8 for ; Mon, 14 May 2018 09:23:44 -0700 (PDT) References: <20180512004311.9299-1-richard.henderson@linaro.org> <20180512004311.9299-7-richard.henderson@linaro.org> From: Richard Henderson Message-ID: <82bd347e-f40a-6385-f297-cc2070ad3fdc@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 09:23:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 06/27] fpu/softfloat: Canonicalize NaN fraction List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= On 05/14/2018 03:29 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 12 May 2018 at 01:42, Richard Henderson wrote: >> Shift the NaN fraction to a canonical position, much like we do >> for the fraction of normal numbers. Immediately, this simplifies >> the float-to-float conversion. Later, this will facilitate >> manipulation of NaNs within the shared code paths. >> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson > > The commit message says it simplifies the float-to-float codepath, > but the patch doesn't touch that: it's missing the part that was in > v1 of the series that removed the > a.frac = a.frac << (64 - srcf->frac_size) >> (64 - dstf->frac_size); > line and updated the associated comment. > > Isn't that change necessary in this patch if we're changing the > canonical representation of NaNs ? With the reordering of the patches, the offending line never gets added. So, yeah, the text should be re-worded here. r~