From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFC351F4B4 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:58:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5FF0388CC06; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:58:31 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A5FF0388CC06 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1610989111; bh=JGpynQZNchmBTvbYSztXO/dadtDOEMO/cqxhZc3oVIM=; h=To:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=nw5MK1KPT0amx1rXwc9lgQXeX/x+ocExN8TPCMoyEO2iWxP7+g7pGFQ51EAElOq7j tumrD0v9i66MwsX3E0wONyTEP7BePFWJvwalCMQLbuy0wYDVJPNJ94FSqUaFQgTE0G wGU7rFHw4+sqZKDn/ri9l6z1B5Sn5VfxAWoCTD08= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838C5387089D for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:58:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 838C5387089D Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-333-9yWfFwuFNVW7ZPEJ3KdeIA-1; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 11:58:26 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 9yWfFwuFNVW7ZPEJ3KdeIA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B7BB10054FF; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:58:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-112-110.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.110]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA43071C92; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 16:58:21 +0000 (UTC) To: Wilco Dijkstra via Libc-alpha Subject: Re: New math test failures on Fedora/33 References: Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 17:58:17 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Wilco Dijkstra via Libc-alpha's message of "Mon, 18 Jan 2021 14:22:50 +0000") Message-ID: <874kjenpw6.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Florian Weimer Cc: Wilco Dijkstra Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" * Wilco Dijkstra via Libc-alpha: > On the subject of ULPs, how about centralizing the ULP files into a > single generic file and only adding entries to target ULP files for > special cases? We've discussed this a while back for other implementation divergence: Dealing with target variance As far as could tell at the time, the consensus was that we should use separate files instead of consolidation in one file with some form of conditionals. Maybe math test data has different properties, leading to a different outcome. Thanks, Florian -- Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill