On 19 January 2015 at 15:43, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: > 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.
Leave this one out until we understand why it fails. /Marcus
