atrosinenko added inline comments.
================ Comment at: compiler-rt/test/builtins/Unit/divdf3_test.c:80 + // divisor is 1.0 as UQ1.31 + if (test__divdf3(0x1.0p+0, 0x1.00000001p+0, UINT64_C(0x3fefffffffe00000))) return 1; ---------------- sepavloff wrote: > atrosinenko wrote: > > sepavloff wrote: > > > Is 0x1.00000001p+0 equal to 1.0 in UQ1.31? > > Divisor is `1.(31 zeroes)1` after restoring the implicit bit, so it is > > **truncated** to 1.0 as UQ1.31. Instead of counting bits carefully, it > > would probably be better to add several tests with the `1` bit shifted 1-2 > > places left/right as well as if the divisor is round up instead of > > truncating - //just in case//. :) So, with table-driven test it would > > probably be simpler to not make extra assumptions on the implementation. > > Divisor is 1.(31 zeroes)1 > > So it is **not** `1.0` and the comment is misleading. Try rewording the > comment to avoid confusion. Maybe `divisor is truncated to 1.0 in UQ1.31` or > something like that. Now got it, thank you. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D84932/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D84932 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits