https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111876
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #2) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > This could either be wrong code for not doing the promotion or just missing > > the libgcc functions (which could be implemented as doing the promotion). > > > > Either ways confirmed. > > thanks, for checking. > but I think the underlying concern is that providing a disjoint extension > (+fp16) should not alter the behaviour of bf16 (in this case I did some > limited poking about but could not see any obvious place where the addition > of fp16 alters complex number handling). The difference comes from the front-end which adds the promotions even.
