From: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] math: move i386 sqrtf to C
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 17:00:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200109220014.GX30412@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200109210003.GO23985@port70.net>
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:00:06PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> > If we want to ensure correct rounding (important for sqrt[f]) even on
> > broken compilers (some ppl use gcc 3.x, and pcc may be broken too?)
> > perhaps we should just do the store from asm too?
>
> that would be a bit safer, but then correct compiler would
> store twice i think.
If you did something like:
float y = expr_with_excess_precision;
__asm__( "" : "+m"(y));
return y;
then I think you'd get just one store and one load, as intended. It
seems to work as intended here. Oddly though my local gcc (7.3) is
gratuitously pushing/popping a single gpr to align stack to 8 (but not
16) despite being a leaf function. No idea why.
> it's hard to get excited about this
> issue: it only matters on m68k and i386 which are not the
> main targets for new float code (and old code had to deal
> with this and bigger brokenness already).
Indeed, but context of present thread is getting rid of the i386 asm
files so it's relevant here.
> > Note that eval_as_float only helps if -ffloat-store is used, which is
> > a nasty hack and also nonconforming, arguably worse than the behavior
> > without it, so we should probably drop use of that as a fallback, and
> > use fp_barrier[f] instead if needed.
>
> i think -ffloat-store almost always drops excess precision
> including returns and assignments, so with that no
> annotation is needed. but yes the way the annotation is
> defined now is not useful against broken compilers or
> non-standard excess precision setting, in glibc the
> annotation is defined differently (with inline asm).
I was thinking in the context of wanting to remove from configure the:
|| { test "$ARCH" = i386 && tryflag CFLAGS_C99FSE -ffloat-store ; }
which is probably doing more harm than good. Do you know if there are
things that'd break if we did that? I think eval_as_float should
probably be defined as fp_barrierf to make it safe in your code,
conditional on FLT_EVAL_METHOD>0 (and likewise >1 for eval_as_double).
Rich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-09 22:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-05 16:35 math patches for moving bare asm to C inline asm Alexander Monakov
2020-01-05 16:36 ` [PATCH] math: move x86_64 fabs, fabsf to C with " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-05 20:05 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-05 21:32 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-01-05 22:43 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-06 8:17 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-01-06 8:40 ` [PATCH] math: move more x86-family fabs functions to C Alexander Monakov
2020-03-21 17:06 ` [musl] " Rich Felker
2020-01-06 16:50 ` [PATCH] math: move trivial x86-family sqrt " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-06 17:43 ` [PATCH] math: move i386 sqrtf " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-06 18:32 ` Pascal Cuoq
2020-01-09 15:55 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-01-09 17:00 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-09 21:00 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-01-09 22:00 ` Rich Felker [this message]
2020-01-09 23:18 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-01-10 2:07 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-10 9:17 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-01-14 17:59 ` [musl] " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-14 18:47 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-01-07 13:06 ` [PATCH] math: move i386 sqrt " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-08 7:26 ` Rich Felker
2020-03-21 17:53 ` [musl] " Rich Felker
2020-03-21 17:57 ` Rich Felker
2020-03-21 20:30 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-01-11 15:06 ` [PATCH] math: move x86_64 (l)lrint(f) functions " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-11 15:23 ` [PATCH] math: move more x86-family lrint " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-11 16:07 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-11 16:22 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-14 11:54 ` [musl] [PATCH] math: move x86-family rint " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-14 18:17 ` [musl] Q: dealing with missing removal of excess precision Alexander Monakov
2020-01-14 18:50 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-01-14 18:58 ` Rich Felker
2020-01-14 19:53 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-02-06 14:51 ` Rich Felker
2020-02-06 17:15 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-02-06 17:46 ` Rich Felker
2020-02-06 19:03 ` Rich Felker
2020-02-06 20:02 ` Rich Felker
2020-02-06 22:08 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-02-22 19:59 ` Rich Felker
2020-02-22 20:21 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-02-23 0:19 ` Rich Felker
2020-02-23 16:14 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-03-20 18:12 ` Rich Felker
2020-03-22 1:19 ` Rich Felker
2020-03-22 17:40 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-03-22 17:53 ` Rich Felker
2020-03-22 18:51 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-03-22 19:10 ` Rich Felker
2020-03-22 19:46 ` Alexander Monakov
2020-01-14 20:41 ` [musl] [PATCH] math: move x86-family remainder functions to C Alexander Monakov
2020-01-15 6:54 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-01-15 15:44 ` [musl] [PATCH] math: move x86-family fmod " Alexander Monakov
2020-01-16 21:00 ` [musl] [PATCH] math: add x86_64 remquol Alexander Monakov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200109220014.GX30412@brightrain.aerifal.cx \
--to=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).