This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: IBM long double fixes
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Steve Munroe <sjmunroe at us dot ibm dot com>, Ryan Arnold <ryanarn at us dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 07:58:32 -0400
- Subject: Re: IBM long double fixes
- References: <20130625063840 dot GK21523 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <mvmy59yps96 dot fsf at hawking dot suse dot de> <20130625114529 dot GM21523 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1306251324380 dot 10165 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20130626002851 dot GN21523 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org>
On 06/25/2013 08:28 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 01:31:36PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, Alan Modra wrote:
>>
>>> * sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128ibm/e_rem_pio2l.c: Comment fix.
>>
>> This comment fix can go in straight away as obvious.
>>
>> Fixes for bugs that were user-visible in past releases should have an
>> associated bug in Bugzilla with [BZ #N] in the ChangeLog entry and the bug
>> number listed in NEWS as fixed (if the bug was fully fixed), and testcases
>> for the testsuite may be a good idea as well (though we're less strict
>> about that for system-specific bugs). I know of at least bugs 5268 and
>> 14551 as known IBM long double bugs in glibc, although the former doesn't
>> give a self-contained testcase so it's not clear what the bug is supposed
>> to be there. I don't know if those bugs correspond to some of what you're
>> fixing or what other bugs might need to be filed to cover the fixes.
>
> There is some chance that 5268 is fixed by
> http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-06/msg00919.html
> but it doesn't fix 14551. I didn't develop the denormal fixes in
> response to any particular bugzilla, but rather from simply browsing
> the source when making changes for little-endian support, and noticing
> nastiness. In fact, these bug fixes are a distraction from my main
> aim, which is little-endian support.
>
> Do you really have to file a bugzilla to fix bugs around here?
User visible bugs? Yes. It's community policy, so we can have a BZ#
to refer to later and work with downstream. I need not be a magnum opus.
Cheers,
Carlos.