This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Use fabs(f/l) rather than __fabs
Joseph Myers wrote:
> I think you need to add -fno-builtin-fabsl for e_lgammal_r.c, e_log10l.c
> and e_log2l.c in sysdeps/powerpc/nofpu/Makefile, for the same reason as
> the existing -fno-builtin-fabsl uses there - the built-in fabsl does not
> work properly for signed zero for powerpc soft-float / e500v1 (and the
> uses of __fabsl being changed are all uses that need to work correctly for
> signed zero).
Done, I verified that glibcs-powerpc-linux-gnu-soft now builds those files with
-fno-builtin-fabsl and that it passes.
> To be clear, the reason the change is safe regarding namespace issues is
> that the particular functions in question don't get called from C90
> functions in the case where fabsl might not be inlined (which is only the
> powerpc soft-float / e500v1 case where -fno-builtin-fabsl is needed); the
> existence of fabsl calls from other functions is not sufficient. There is
> code to call ldbl-128ibm expl from pow, but that's not one of the affected
> functions and that code doesn't apply for soft-float / e500v1 anyway.
> (fabsl is in fact a reserved name in C90, but the linknamespace tests
> don't know that.)
Right so there are no namespace issues. But what about localplt issues
due to the disabling of fabsl inlining? I can't find any renaming, so why are
there no local plt failures on ppc soft-float?
Wilco