18 Feb 2025 8:51:16 am Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 1:21 AM Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> wrote:
Peter Damianov <peter0...@disroot.org> writes:
POSIX says that sin and cos should set errno to EDOM when infinity is
passed to
them. Make sure this is accounted for in builtins.def, and add tests.
gcc/
PR middle-end/80042
* builtins.def: (sin|cos)(f|l) can set errno.
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.dg/pr80042.c: New testcase.
---
gcc/builtins.def | 20 +++++-----
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr80042.c | 71
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr80042.c
[...]
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr80042.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr80042.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..cc578ae67e2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr80042.c
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+/* dg-do run */
+/* dg-options "-O2 -lm" */
These two lines are missing {}. Please double check the logs from your
testsuite run to make sure newly added/changed tests are executed (and
in the way you expect).
This test will also FAIL on *BSD IIRC as that doesn't set errno for any
math
functions.
So what do you suggest I do about it? Drop the test, or only enable it
for certain known good targets?
I don't use BSD so cannot test it.
I'll note GCC models sincos as cexpi which does not set errno, and will
eventually expand that to sincos or cexp. It does that without any
restriction on -fno-math-errno.
Is this a problem? Would I need to disable expansion to cexp with
-fmath-errno make this work?
I'll also note the C standard does not document any domain error on +-
Inf arguments.
Instead it documents a range error for sin(x) and nonzero x too close
to zero.
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/sin.html
POSIX does specify it should be a domain error, but C itself doesn't seem
to say anything regarding it other than basically "implementations are
allowed to invent errors for this case".
Richard.
[...]
