From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 15966 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2021 22:16:25 -0000
Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 11 Aug 2021 22:16:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 23871 invoked by uid 550); 11 Aug 2021 22:16:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 23853 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2021 22:16:22 -0000
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 00:16:10 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Cc: Stefan Kanthak <stefan.kanthak@nexgo.de>, musl@lists.openwall.com
Message-ID: <20210811221610.GE37904@port70.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
	Stefan Kanthak <stefan.kanthak@nexgo.de>, musl@lists.openwall.com
References: <0C6AAAD55DA44C6189B2FF4F5FB2C3E7@H270>
 <20210810213455.GB37904@port70.net>
 <5C60D05C95724A36B3DB9942D06CFE5F@H270>
 <20210811024010.GA13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <7143269BEC424DE6A3B0218C4268C4C8@H270>
 <20210811160938.GB13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <A626BC84BF3C4C3B88E7F696383397A7@H270>
 <20210811175723.GC13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210811175723.GC13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] Properly simplified nextafter()

* Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> [2021-08-11 13:57:23 -0400]:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 06:50:28PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> > Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> > > static __inline unsigned __FLOAT_BITS(float __f)
> > > {
> > > union {float __f; unsigned __i;} __u;
> > > __u.__f = __f;
> > > return __u.__i;
> > > }
> > >
> > > #define isnan(x) ( \
> > > sizeof(x) == sizeof(float) ? (__FLOAT_BITS(x) & 0x7fffffff) > 0x7f800000 : \
> > > sizeof(x) == sizeof(double) ? (__DOUBLE_BITS(x) & -1ULL>>1) > 0x7ffULL<<52 : \
> > > __fpclassifyl(x) == FP_NAN)
> > >
> > > So, nope.
> > 
> > GCC typically uses its __builtin_isnan() for isnan(), which doesn't
> > use integer instructions or reloads:
> 
> That's only if you #define isnan(x) __builtin_isnan(x)

even then it should use int arithmetics, see below

> 
> > $ cat isnan.c
> > int foo(double x) {
> >     return isnan(x);
> > }
> > int bar(double x) {
> >     return __builtin_isnan(x);
> > }
> > $ gcc -S -O3 -o- isnan.c
> > ....
> >         xorl    %eax, %eax
> >         ucomisd %xmm0, %xmm0
> >         setp    %al
> >         ret
> > ....
> 
> Which glibc, which is what you're using, does.

it is also wrong: isnan must not signal for signaling nan.

this is a gcc bug, it fails even with -fsignaling-nans
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66462

once that's fixed glibc will behave like musl.