On 8 May 2018 at 12:30, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> Peter Maydell writes:
>
>> It is implementation defined whether a multiply-add of
>> (0,inf,qnan) or (inf,0,qnan) raises InvalidaOperation or
>> not, so we let the target-specific pickNaNMulAdd function
>> handle this. This means that we must do the
Peter Maydell writes:
> It is implementation defined whether a multiply-add of
> (0,inf,qnan) or (inf,0,qnan) raises InvalidaOperation or
> not, so we let the target-specific pickNaNMulAdd function
> handle this. This means that we must do the "return the
> default NaN in default NaN mode" check
On 05/04/2018 03:05 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> It is implementation defined whether a multiply-add of
> (0,inf,qnan) or (inf,0,qnan) raises InvalidaOperation or
> not, so we let the target-specific pickNaNMulAdd function
> handle this. This means that we must do the "return the
> default NaN in def
It is implementation defined whether a multiply-add of
(0,inf,qnan) or (inf,0,qnan) raises InvalidaOperation or
not, so we let the target-specific pickNaNMulAdd function
handle this. This means that we must do the "return the
default NaN in default NaN mode" check after the call,
not before. Correc
