Patch is attached.
This patch removes assembly files that implement FMA on ARM and merges
them into the corresponding C files with the same name using inline assembly.
A re-generation of Makefile.in is required.
I don't have any knowledge about ARM assembly. Those functions for ARM
were created us
The correctness of fma() function can be verified using the following program:
---
#include
#include
volatile double x = 0x1.3p52;
volatile double y = 0x1.5p52;
volatile double z = -0x1.8p104;
int main(){
This avoids problems with linking applications that include comutil.h,
but not comdef.h.
Please review.
---
mingw-w64-headers/include/comutil.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mingw-w64-headers/include/comutil.h b/mingw-w64-headers/include/comutil.h
index 57f9ea3..f6d7ad
Please review.
---
mingw-w64-crt/libsrc/uuid.c | 4
mingw-w64-headers/include/cguid.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mingw-w64-crt/libsrc/uuid.c b/mingw-w64-crt/libsrc/uuid.c
index 17e5e07..aaeb4e1 100644
--- a/mingw-w64-crt/libsrc/uuid.c
+++ b/mingw-w64-crt/lib
Hi Jacek,
patch is ok. Please apply.
Thanks,
Kai
2017-01-18 18:06 GMT+01:00 Jacek Caban :
> This avoids problems with linking applications that include comutil.h,
> but not comdef.h.
>
> Please review.
>
> ---
> mingw-w64-headers/include/comutil.h | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
Jacek, please go ahead and apply.
Thanks,
Kai
2017-01-18 18:04 GMT+01:00 Jacek Caban :
> Please review.
>
> ---
> mingw-w64-crt/libsrc/uuid.c | 4
> mingw-w64-headers/include/cguid.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
>
>
>
On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 10:52:40AM +0500, Mihail Konev wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Mihail Konev
> Moved-from: https://github.com/Alexpux/mingw-w64/pull/3
> Reference: https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2016-11/msg2.html
> ---
> v11: const the exported isatty
>
> mingw-w64-crt/Makefile.am
On 1/18/2017 5:14 AM, lhmouse wrote:
> Patch is attached.
I see that you have replaced the x86 parts for fma and fmaf with C
code. That seems like a good thing. Is there some reason you can't do
that with the ARM versions too?
Reducing the amount of platform-specific code also seems like a go
> I see that you have replaced the x86 parts for fma and fmaf with C
> code. That seems like a good thing. Is there some reason you can't do
> that with the ARM versions too?
ARM has hardware FMA and software emulation is not optimal.
> Reducing the amount of platform-specific code also seems