This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [RFC] How to add vector math functions to Glibc
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Andrew Senkevich <andrew dot n dot senkevich at gmail dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 13:55:42 +0000
- Subject: Re: [RFC] How to add vector math functions to Glibc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMXFM3tjquzniXP1weqxSVFJyhXqsf2PHuyrrrmqp7K0ZzORqA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMXFM3tuM_p6Acp4hzoQ2xzR=4BZqtw8NbezqY6h8V4Xx=5hUA at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410021411420 dot 24886 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3uPiuJvSpgmt+8d0B1qh3QSA=TVx0ZExfojDVHzrscL8A at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410091724031 dot 23641 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3uGOKqEAvGYew+9K7bmhObVmnP2u4kUOSh8_Cpwyk8s5g at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410162141290 dot 32736 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3tf3EE-WenvnVohkFCkHR9Dy4QfaSiSHcw6Q-1o9QGW_Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410211517340 dot 31277 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3t8xjQ7A6TF1SpY0GwzKpTQ9hZej4vKvSYHnnsxGkaONA at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410232117130 dot 19073 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3uc9igKt7uDEOQP9Xhw9UFw+iDgY3YvbAk31Ze1NuBEHg at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410291835550 dot 21975 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMXFM3saHV5m1B6-tBuJ6CVAusiFfpvWe4p-sZhzoNWMu5MBVQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
> > Well, maybe a preliminary refactoring patch is needed that separates FUNC
> > into multiple macros, one for functions used in testsuite infrastructure
> > and one for functions being tested.
> >
> > There are lots of RUN_TEST_* macros (I don't think we should assume that
> > only one of them will only ever be relevant for vector tests) - it seems a
> > bad idea for every one of them to need to repeat something so cryptic as
> > CONCAT (CONCAT3_1 (VEC_PREFIX_, FUNC_NAME, FUNC ( )), FUNC (FUNC_NAME)).
>
> But it is already old code, yesterday's patch looks so in this place:
> FUNC_TEST (FUNC_NAME) (ARG)
As I said, *preliminary refactoring patch*. Long sequences of variations
on the same patch aren't helpful; if you find yourself sending them, you
need to step back and think very carefully about how to restructure the
submission to make things as clear and as easy to review as possible.
That includes separating out any pieces, large or small, that are
reasonably separable and can be justified on their own merits. Having
separated them, you then need to make *self-contained* submissions
(including all relevant rationale and background), and ping those
submissions weekly as needed (I haven't seen any pings of the binutils
version requirement patch). And please keep the state for your own
patches in patchwork.sourceware.org clean; I see six entries there with
the same description "[RFC] How to add vector math functions to Glibc",
when there should be at most one.
If you do need to make multiple submissions of successive versions of the
same patch, consider the submission style where each submission contains
both the full self-contained description and rationale (that would go in
the git log message) and a separate description of what has changed
relative to the previous patch version (and number each patch version).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com