> I stitched together appropriate ChangeLog entries and pushed this to
the
> trunk (I don't think Lehua has write access).
Thank you!
Best,
Lehua
On 6/9/23 05:56, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 11:58 AM Lehua Ding wrote:
It's odd that the checksum doesn't depend on the number of iterations done ...
This is because the difference between the calculated result (32063.902344) and
the expected result (320
On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 11:58 AM Lehua Ding wrote:
>
> > It's odd that the checksum doesn't depend on the number of iterations done
> > ...
>
> This is because the difference between the calculated result (32063.902344)
> and
> the expected result (32000.00) is small. The current check is tha
> It's odd that the checksum doesn't depend on the number of iterations done ...
This is because the difference between the calculated result (32063.902344) and
the expected result (32000.00) is small. The current check is that the
result
is considered correct as long as the `value/expected`
On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 1:24 PM Lehua Ding wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch fixes the problem that the loop in the tsvc s176 function is
> optimized and removed because `iterations/LEN_1D` is 0 (where iterations
> is set to 1, LEN_1D is set to 32000 in tsvc.h).
>
> This testcase passed on x86 and
