On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 12:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 11:53, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++
> <libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > Tested x86_64-linux, and basic soundness check on vax-dec-netbsdelf.
>
> But apparently not enough of a soundness check, because
> isnan(__builtin_nan("")) is true for VAX, so GCC seems to have a NaN
> pattern, despite what I read online about the format.
>
> Fix on the way ...
Here's the fix that adds support for VAX NaN (and works around
PR104865 which I discovered while trying to make this work).
Tested x86_64-linux, and slightly tested on vax-dec-netbsdelf again.
Pushed to trunk.
commit 73f3b8a53e6664c079731c2a183c16621481d039
Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com>
Date: Thu Mar 10 14:17:03 2022
libstdc++: Fix std::strong_order to handle NaN on VAX
I mistakenly believed that VAX floats do not support NaN, but with GCC
__builtin_isnan(__builtin_nan("")) is true. That means my previous
change to <compare> is wrong, because it fails to handle NaN.
When std::numeric_limits<floating-point-type>::is_iec559 is false, as on
VAX, the standard only requires an ordering that is consistent with the
ordering observed by comparison operators. With this change the ordering
is -NaN < numbers < +NaN, and there is no support for different NaN bit
patterns (as I'm not even sure if GCC supports any for VAX).
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* libsupc++/compare (_Strong_order::_S_fp_cmp) [__vax__]:
Handle NaN.
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/compare b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/compare
index 3c22d9addf1..6e1ed53eeed 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/compare
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/compare
@@ -844,8 +844,16 @@ namespace std
_S_fp_cmp(_Tp __x, _Tp __y) noexcept
{
#ifdef __vax__
- // VAX format has no NaN, only "excess" for Inf, so totally ordered.
- return __builtin_bit_cast(strong_ordering, __x <=> __y);
+ if (__builtin_isnan(__x) || __builtin_isnan(__y))
+ {
+ int __ix = (bool) __builtin_isnan(__x);
+ int __iy = (bool) __builtin_isnan(__y);
+ __ix *= __builtin_signbit(__x) ? -1 : 1;
+ __iy *= __builtin_signbit(__y) ? -1 : 1;
+ return __ix <=> __iy;
+ }
+ else
+ return __builtin_bit_cast(strong_ordering, __x <=> __y);
#endif
auto __ix = _S_fp_bits(__x);
