On 2011-10-18 07:15:31 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > I have reopened the bug, but tagged it moreinfo + unreproducible given > fma() has been implemented in eglibc 2.13, and that the testcases you > provided now pass correctly on at least i386 and amd64. > > Please provide some more details or testcases.
Ah, I didn't see that the bug that was opened upstream yeaterday was against an old glibc version! Still, Bruno Haible said: "I see 6 different implementations of fma(), 4 implementations of fmaf(), and 4 implementations of fmal() in the glibc source code. How can you guarantee that all of them are thoroughly tested? The ones in math/s_fma.c, math/s_fmaf.c, math/s_fmal.c are definitely buggy." But I wonder whether Debian supports a platform with such an implementation. The old upstream bug http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3268 was also still open. I'll try to write my own test suite (based on difficult cases and with the 4 rounding modes). -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111018145226.gs9...@xvii.vinc17.org
