On 19 January 2015 at 14:29, Marcus Shawcroft <marcus.shawcr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 January 2015 at 17:52, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> > wrote: > >>> OK provided, as per the previous couple, that we don;t regression or >>> introduce new fails on aarch64[_be] or aarch32. >> >> This patch shows failures on aarch64 and aarch64_be for vmax and vmin >> when the input is -NaN. >> It's a corner case, and my reading of the ARM ARM is that the result >> should the same as on aarch32. >> I haven't had time to look at it in more details though. >> So, not OK? > > They should have the same behaviour in aarch32 and aarch64. Did you > test on HW or a model? > I ran the tests on qemu for aarch32 and aarch64-linux, and on the foundation model for aarch64*-elf.
> /Marcus
