From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from second.openwall.net (second.openwall.net [193.110.157.125]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 013FF28CA0 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2024 17:18:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 29765 invoked by uid 550); 12 Jun 2024 15:18:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 29731 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2024 15:18:44 -0000 Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 11:18:59 -0400 From: Rich Felker To: Meng Zhuo Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20240612151859.GT10433@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20240612151413.306650-1-mzh@mzh.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20240612151413.306650-1-mzh@mzh.io> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH v2] math: add riscv64 round/roundf On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 11:14:13PM +0800, Meng Zhuo wrote: > --- > v1 -> v2: > * drop ±inf check and use fabs as Rich suggested That is not the significant change. The significant change is fixing completely wrong behavior on large finite inputs. > --- > src/math/riscv64/round.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > src/math/riscv64/roundf.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 src/math/riscv64/round.c > create mode 100644 src/math/riscv64/roundf.c > > diff --git a/src/math/riscv64/round.c b/src/math/riscv64/round.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..81991b5f > --- /dev/null > +++ b/src/math/riscv64/round.c > @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ > +#include > + > +#if __riscv_flen >= 64 > + > +double round(double x) > +{ > + if (isnan(x)) return x; > + if (fabs(x) >= 0x1p54) return x; Did you keep the isnan test separate to avoid raising an exception, or for other reasons? Rich