Ping Re: Fix IBM long double spurious overflows

Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com
Tue Jan 28 17:51:00 GMT 2014


On Mon, 6 Jan 2014, David Edelsohn wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > This patch fixes various cases of spurious overflow exceptions in the
> > IBM long double support code.  The generic issue is that an initial
> > approximation is computed by using the relevant arithmetic operation
> > on the high parts of the operands - but this may overflow double in
> > some cases where the final result is large but still a long way (up to
> > around 2^53 ulp) from overflowing long double.  For division overflow
> > could occur not just from the initial a / c division but also from the
> > subsequent multiplication of the result by c (in some cases where a is
> > DBL_MAX, say), when the final result of the division need not be large
> > at all.
> >
> > __gcc_qadd already tried to handle such overflow cases, but detected
> > them by examining the result of the addition of high parts - which
> > leaves a spurious overflow exception raised even if it returns the
> > correct non-overflowing value.  This patch instead checks the operands
> > and does appropriate scaling, in all of __gcc_qadd, __gcc_qmul and
> > __gcc_qdiv, to avoid spurious overflow exceptions arising as well as
> > avoiding the bad results arising from such overflows.
> >
> > Tested with no regressions with cross to powerpc-linux-gnu (and also
> > ran the glibc libm tests, which provide a rather more thorough test of
> > floating-point arithmetic than the GCC testsuite; this patch fixes, at
> > least, bad results from cbrtl (LDBL_MAX) that arose from the second
> > division issue mentioned, as well as the specific cases shown in the
> > tests added to the GCC testsuite).  OK to commit?
> 
> Before we go farther down this path, IBM needs to internally decide on
> the end goal and the amount of language / library conformance that
> makes sense for the IBM long double format.

Ping.  Original patch: 
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00157.html>.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list