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)
