On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:54:34 PDT (-0700), Jeff Law wrote:
On 3/19/24 10:23 AM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:50:14 PDT (-0700), jeffreya...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/18/24 3:09 AM, Jivan Hakobyan wrote:
As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use them instead of
calling
On 3/19/24 10:23 AM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:50:14 PDT (-0700), jeffreya...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/18/24 3:09 AM, Jivan Hakobyan wrote:
As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use them instead of
calling the library functions.
With my patch for the following C
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:58:41 PDT (-0700), Andrew Waterman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:23 AM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:50:14 PDT (-0700), jeffreya...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> On 3/18/24 3:09 AM, Jivan Hakobyan wrote:
>> As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:23 AM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:50:14 PDT (-0700), jeffreya...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 3/18/24 3:09 AM, Jivan Hakobyan wrote:
> >> As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use them instead of
> >> calling the library functions.
> >>
>
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:50:14 PDT (-0700), jeffreya...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/18/24 3:09 AM, Jivan Hakobyan wrote:
As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use them instead of
calling the library functions.
With my patch for the following C code:
double foo(double a) {
return ceil(
On 3/18/24 3:09 AM, Jivan Hakobyan wrote:
As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use them instead of
calling the library functions.
With my patch for the following C code:
double foo(double a) {
return ceil(a);
}
GCC generates the following ASM code (before it was tail call)
As RV has round instructions it is reasonable to use them instead of
calling the library functions.
With my patch for the following C code:
double foo(double a) {
return ceil(a);
}
GCC generates the following ASM code (before it was tail call)
foo:
fabs.d fa4,fa0
lui a5,%
