From: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>
To: "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Cc: "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ieee754/dbl-64: Reduce the scope of temporary storage variables
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:09:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d22b849-e27d-9843-90e3-7ea635c6d863@synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <115b2236-e994-cdfd-d96e-2e8d354b7fde@synopsys.com>
On 6/4/20 12:08 PM, Vineet Gupta via Libc-alpha wrote:
> On 6/2/20 1:31 PM, Vineet Gupta via Libc-alpha wrote:
>> On 6/2/20 11:16 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>> On Mon, 1 Jun 2020, Vineet Gupta via Libc-alpha wrote:
>>>
>>>> Also as suggested by Joseph [1] used --strip and compared the libs with
>>>> and w/o patch and their sizes are exactly same (with gcc 9).
>>>
>>> My suggestion was to compare the *contents* of the libraries, not just
>>> their sizes. Either they should be byte-for-byte identical, or if there
>>> are other differences (register allocation, line numbers in assertions,
>>> etc.) a more detailed investigation will be needed.
>>>
>>
>> Here's my diff of the 2 --strip builds
>>
>> for i in `find . -name libm-2.31.9000.so`; do echo $i; diff $i
>> /SCRATCH/vgupta/gnu2/install/glibcs/$i ; echo $?; done
>>
>> ./aarch64-linux-gnu/lib64/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./arm-linux-gnueabi/lib/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./x86_64-linux-gnu/lib64/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./arm-linux-gnueabihf/lib/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./riscv64-linux-gnu-rv64imac-lp64/lib64/lp64/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./riscv64-linux-gnu-rv64imafdc-lp64/lib64/lp64/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./powerpc-linux-gnu/lib/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./microblaze-linux-gnu/lib/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./nios2-linux-gnu/lib/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./hppa-linux-gnu/lib/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>> ./s390x-linux-gnu/lib64/libm-2.31.9000.so
>> 0
>
> Is this sufficient for comparison ?
ping !
_______________________________________________
linux-snps-arc mailing list
linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-15 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-11 19:43 [PATCH] ieee754/dbl-64: Reduce the scope of temporary storage variables Vineet Gupta
2019-11-11 22:33 ` Joseph Myers
2019-11-11 22:43 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-11-11 22:52 ` Joseph Myers
2020-06-02 2:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Vineet Gupta
2020-06-02 18:16 ` Joseph Myers
2020-06-02 20:31 ` Vineet Gupta
2020-06-04 19:08 ` Vineet Gupta
2020-06-15 19:09 ` Vineet Gupta [this message]
2020-06-15 19:43 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-06-15 19:53 ` Joseph Myers
2020-06-15 20:12 ` Vineet Gupta
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6d22b849-e27d-9843-90e3-7ea635c6d863@synopsys.com \
--to=vineet.gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).