c99-math execute failures on sparc-sun-solaris2.11

[Andreas Tobler]

Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:

> Great, we're making progress.
> 
> On mainline only (not 4.2 or prior) does this work instead?

Yep, trunk.

[ultra10:gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg] andreast% diff -u 
/usr/include/iso/math_c99.h.orig /usr/include/iso/math_c99.h
--- /usr/include/iso/math_c99.h.orig    Mon Feb  4 21:55:29 2008
+++ /usr/include/iso/math_c99.h Tue Feb  5 22:54:34 2008
@@ -67,10 +67,14 @@
                         __builtin_isunordered(__x_n, __x_n); })
  #endif
  #undef isinf
+#if __GNUC__ >= 4
+#define isinf(x) 	__builtin_isinf(x)
+#else
  #define        isinf(x)        __extension__( \
                         { __typeof(x) __x_i = (x); \
                         __x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) INFINITY || \
                         __x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) (-INFINITY); })
+#endif
  #undef isfinite
  #define        isfinite(x)     __extension__( \
                         { __typeof(x) __x_f = (x); \
> 
> #undef isinf
> #define isinf(x) __builtin_isinf(x)

[ultra10:head/objdir/gcc] andreast% gmake 
RUNTESTFLAGS='dg.exp=c99-math-*' check

                 === gcc Summary ===

# of expected passes            6


> 
> 
> 
> How about this?  (Can be run on any branch)  Hopefully there are no 
> typos...
> 
> #undef isinf
> #define isinf(x)        __extension__( \
>                        { __typeof(x) __x_i = (x); ! isnan(__x_i) && \
>                        (__x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) INFINITY || \
>                        __x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) (-INFINITY)); })

[ultra10:gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg] andreast# diff -u 
/usr/include/iso/math_c99.h.orig /usr/include/iso/math_c99.h
--- /usr/include/iso/math_c99.h.orig    Mon Feb  4 21:55:29 2008
+++ /usr/include/iso/math_c99.h Tue Feb  5 23:01:37 2008
@@ -68,9 +68,9 @@
  #endif
  #undef isinf
  #define        isinf(x)        __extension__( \
-                       { __typeof(x) __x_i = (x); \
-                       __x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) INFINITY || \
-                       __x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) (-INFINITY); })
+                       { __typeof(x) __x_i = (x); ! isnan(__x_i) &&\
+                       (__x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) INFINITY || \
+                       __x_i == (__typeof(__x_i)) (-INFINITY)); })
  #undef isfinite
  #define        isfinite(x)     __extension__( \
                         { __typeof(x) __x_f = (x); \

gmake RUNTESTFLAGS='dg.exp=c99-math-*' check

                 === gcc Summary ===

# of expected passes            6


Both tests were done on trunk, 4.3.
I might test on 4.2.x later tomorrow, if needed.

> 
> The __builtin_inf(x) style up above is what is done on mainline for 
> solaris10.  The second one is what is done in the solaris11 system 
> header but I added a !isnan(x).  I'm not sure which of these styles 
> makes the most sense to plug into fixincludes.
> 
> Another option would be to file a bug report with sun and have them fix 
> the header internally using one of these three methods.  I think they'd 
> choose the latter as it should work with any gcc version, not just the 
> latest ones. But that's up to them.  In fixincludes we're free to make 
> any choice we want for mainline and/or branches as needed.

Filing bugs is nice, but do not expect a fast solution. So, if _we_ need 
a solution, we have to act. If opensolaris needs a solution, they have 
to act.

Personally I'd like them to 'fix' the issue. Otherwise we're 'papering' 
over an issue they have!?

> 
> Thoughts?

I'll give you feedback about 4.2.x later to tomorrow.

Thanks again,
Andreas