From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Thu Jan 14 15:49:48 2010 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:46:20 -0500 (EST) From: Keith Scroggins To: MiNT Mailing List Subject: Re: [MiNT] gmp test fails In-Reply-To: <4B4F7F51.7060403@freesbee.fr> Message-ID: References: <1263466756.16683.4293.camel@jetpack.demon.co.uk> <4B4F7F51.7060403@freesbee.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-559023410-824023566-1263501980=:1986" X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: kws@radix.net Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---559023410-824023566-1263501980=:1986 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE I haven't had time to post today at all (taking a break from computer=20 security spreadsheet hell @ work today at the moment). Here is a working GMP from March 2009: http://www.radix.net/~atari/mint/gmp-4.2.4-1.m68kmint.rpm All tests passed (this was when Vincent fixed some MiNTLin issues brought= =20 up from tests failing), and I was able to assemble this into an RPM. I=20 "think" this was linked against fdlibm on my CT60 Falcon, but I need to=20 check it out this weekend hopefully. It definitely was built with the=20 default parameters, so it was targeted at 68000/msoft-float. Building with GCC 4.4.2 / BinUtils 2.20 / CVS MiNTLib for Oct gets me 13=20 errors in the mpz tests (after fixng stacks for a couple), and that is as= =20 far as I have gotten with this. Basically did that last night. Don't think I really shared too much. I was going to switch from fdlibm=20 to pml and retry the build, maybe tonight. Keith On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Vincent Rivi=E8re wrote: > Miro Kropacek wrote: >> fdlibm or pml ? >>=20 >> default from easymint, i.e. fdlibm I guess. > > This is what I feared from a long time... the libm issues. > > Originally I used PML because I was not aware of fdlibm. As it seemed to = be=20 > quite OK, I never made the effort to switch to fdlibm (yet). > > When I made the objstack patch, I'm pretty sure all the tests had passed = for=20 > 68000. I had compiled them with the cross-compiler and PML, then I ran th= em=20 > on ARAnyM through the hostfs. > > I'm not sure, but I may have tried the 68020-60 version and there was=20 > failures... I don't remember well. > However, I'm not sure if all the floating-point implementations are stric= tly=20 > equivalent, maybe there are some roundings approximations... However the = gmp=20 > tests are certainly aware of that. > > Some time ago I have compiled the latest POV-Ray for MiNT. I used my=20 > cross-gcc and PML, as usual. The 68000 and ColdFire version works perfect= ly=20 > (but PML sometimes print warnings on the screen !). The 68020-60 version= =20 > produces images with very wrong colors. > > POV-Ray and GMP are good examples because they heavily use the floating p= oint=20 > functions. > > Note there is a particularity on GCC for m68k. On 68000 and ColdFire, the= =20 > floats are returned in d0 as usual. But on 68020+, they are returned in = the=20 > FPU register fp0 ! If all the libraries are compiled with the same option= s=20 > and the same compiler, there is no problem. But this certainly a source o= f=20 > problems, and I'm sure it is the case for POV-Ray. However I have not yet= =20 > investigated this issue. > Note that this odd return value behaviour was here in GCC 2.95.3 for MiNT= ,=20 > and I kept it in GCC 4.x. > > I don't know if all these problems are related. > > There are not so much functions in the libm, we should make some basic te= sts=20 > manually, then it would be good to find a testsuite. > > About the math libraries, there is one in Newlib, however I don't know if= it=20 > is as much optimized as fdlibm. > > --=20 > Vincent Rivi=E8re > > ---559023410-824023566-1263501980=:1986--