On Fri, 18 Dec 2020, Patrick McGehearty via Gcc-patches wrote:

> TEST Data

I'd still like to see the test data / code used to produce the accuracy 
and performance results made available somewhere (presumably with a link 
then being provided in the commit message).

> +       if ((mode == TYPE_MODE (float_type_node))
> +           || (mode == TYPE_MODE (double_type_node))
> +           || (mode == TYPE_MODE (long_double_type_node)))
> +         {
> +           char val_name[64];
> +           char fname[8] = "";
> +           if (mode == TYPE_MODE (float_type_node))
> +             memcpy (fname, "FLT", 4);
> +           else if (mode == TYPE_MODE (double_type_node))
> +             memcpy (fname, "DBL", 4);
> +           else if (mode == TYPE_MODE (long_double_type_node))
> +             memcpy (fname, "LDBL", 5);

This logic being used to generate EPSILON, MAX and MIN macros only handles 
modes that match float, double or long double (so won't define the macros 
for a mode that only matches another type such as _Float128, for example).

Earlier in the same function, there is existing code to define 
__LIBGCC_%s_FUNC_EXT__.  That code has to do something similar, to 
determine the matching type for a mode - but it also handles _FloatN / 
_FloatNx types, and has an assertion at the end that some matching type 
was found.

Rather than having this code which handles a more limited set of types, I 
think the __LIBGCC_%s_FUNC_EXT__ code should be extended, so that as well 
as computing a function suffix it also computes a prefix such as FLT, DBL, 
FLT128 or FLT64X.  Then all supported floating-point modes can get these 
three LIBGCC macros defined, rather than just those matching float, double 
or long double.

>  #elif defined(L_mulxc3) || defined(L_divxc3)
>  # define MTYPE       XFtype
>  # define CTYPE       XCtype
>  # define MODE        xc
>  # define CEXT        __LIBGCC_XF_FUNC_EXT__
>  # define NOTRUNC (!__LIBGCC_XF_EXCESS_PRECISION__)
> +# define RBIG        ((__LIBGCC_XF_MAX__)/2)
> +# define RMIN        (__LIBGCC_XF_MIN__)
> +# define RMIN2       (__LIBGCC_DF_EPSILON__)
> +# define RMINSCAL (1/__LIBGCC_DF_EPSILON__)
> +# define RMAX2       ((RBIG)*(RMIN2))

I'd then expect __LIBGCC_XF_EPSILON__ to be used for XFmode in place of 
__LIBGCC_DF_EPSILON__ unless there is some good reason to use the latter 
(which would need a comment to explain it if so).

>  #elif defined(L_multc3) || defined(L_divtc3)
>  # define MTYPE       TFtype
>  # define CTYPE       TCtype
>  # define MODE        tc
>  # define CEXT        __LIBGCC_TF_FUNC_EXT__
>  # define NOTRUNC (!__LIBGCC_TF_EXCESS_PRECISION__)
> +#if defined(__LIBGCC_TF_MIN__)
> +# define RBIG        ((__LIBGCC_TF_MAX__)/2)
> +# define RMIN        (__LIBGCC_TF_MIN__)
> +#else
> +# define RBIG        ((__LIBGCC_XF_MAX__)/2)
> +# define RMIN        (__LIBGCC_XF_MIN__)
> +#endif
> +# define RMIN2       (__LIBGCC_DF_EPSILON__)
> +# define RMINSCAL (1/__LIBGCC_DF_EPSILON__)

And, likewise, with the suggested changes to c-cppbuiltin.c this code can 
use __LIBGCC_TF_MAX__, __LIBGCC_TF_MIN__ and __LIBGCC_TF_EPSILON__ 
unconditionally, without ever needing to use XF or DF macros.  (If you 
want to use a different EPSILON value in the case where TFmode is IBM long 
double because of LDBL_EPSILON being too small in that case, condition 
that on __LIBGCC_TF_MANT_DIG__ == 106, and use ((TFtype) 0x1p-106) in 
place of __LIBGCC_TF_EPSILON__ in that case.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com

Reply via email to