On Jan 9, 2008, at 9:38 AM, Liu Yu wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> On Behalf Of Kumar Gala >> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 2:20 PM >> To: Dan Malek >> Cc: Liu Yu; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix remainder calculating bug in single >> floating pointdivision >> >> >> On Jan 6, 2008, at 2:44 PM, Dan Malek wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 6, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >>> >>>> It's nice to see somebody digging in that scary math emu stuff. If >>>> you could also get rid of the warnings, it would be perfect :-) >>> >>> Yes, it is :-) I didn't think it would have a life beyond MPC8xx. >>> >>>> .... that this code was lifted from >>>> somewhere else (glibc ? gcc soft-float ?), >>> >>> It seems like a lifetime ago.... I copied the framework >> from Sparc, >>> and the internals from gcc soft-float. I didn't change any of the >>> internal emulation functions (hence, some of the warnings), >> just the >>> calling interface. >>> >>> While it's convenient, I still don't think kernel float emulation >>> should be a solution. The tools should generate soft-float for the >>> applications and libraries. >> >> If we think this is really true, we could move to using include/math- >> emu/* instead of the files in powerpc/math-emu. > > Why it's better to move to using include/math-emu. > I found they have similar framework, is powerpc/math-emu evolved from > include/math-emu?
* We dont really need more than one way in the kernel source tree to do math-emu * include/math-emu is used by more archs so gets more review * include/math-emu is closer to glibc soft-fp code so fixes to one apply cleanly to the other - k _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
