On 21/2/25 14:28, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 at 13:05, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org> wrote:
Hi Peter,
On 17/2/25 13:50, Peter Maydell wrote:
(1) floatx80 behaviours
Two QEMU targets implement floatx80: x86 and m68k. (PPC also has one
use in the xsrqpxp round-to-80-bit-precision operation, and the
Linux-user NWFPE emulation nominally supports it, but these are
minor.) x86 and m68k disagree about some of the corner cases of
floatx80 where the value has the explicit Integer bit wrongly set. At
the moment the fpu code defaults to "floatx80 behaves like x86", with
TARGET_M68K ifdefs to get the other option.
The first six patches in this series remove those ifdefs, replacing
them with a floatx80_behaviour field in float_status which can have
various flags set to select the individual behaviours. The default is
"like x86", which allows us to set these only for m68k and not worry
about the minor "technically makes some use of floatx80" cases.
Peter Maydell (10):
fpu: Make targets specify floatx80 default Inf at runtime
target/m68k: Avoid using floatx80_infinity global const
target/i386: Avoid using floatx80_infinity global const
Could you add a preparatory patch passing float_status argument
here? This eases the following patch review.
I could, and in retrospect I agree it would have been a better
division of patches, but both you and RTH have already reviewed
patches 4 and 5 in their current form, so is it worth doing now ?
If it isn't too much a burden, I'd prefer to have the extra patches
included. Not for today's review, but for our future readers learning
from the git history (as I'm custom to).
I understand you are waiting RTH's ack on patch #6 to update it and
don't plan to respin. If you agree to split, I suppose it isn't in
your principles to merge a series without posting the final result
on the list. I have the patches locally split so can post as v2 base
if that helps. Otherwise I won't insist, up to your workflow :)
Regards,
Phil.
