DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 49DB0MGb2871976
Authentication-Results: delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=eB6car+F
X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 806073858427
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1728817220;
	bh=LgU5xBWJRO+qvCT6d7lzPLUd6M4O9PNX0HhNnB1fRFw=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	 List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:
	 From;
	b=eB6car+FAaoVrayVsH92xK5AkFSD92E5yengiLBI58yM8TGPAwy8DUEpkrgSkMKi4
	 lF7J74z3fZmiflsSWwuOZYOaFcY7ZD1W2N16+0Hig/wL8Nd/G/KU7UuGo7jbYiHJ7q
	 g9IvD0oAIcq9kZwBtWOsKrFn5UAZxFrPDonadQBw=
X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 82F0B3858C32
ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 82F0B3858C32
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1728817193; cv=none;
 b=U9+o4Pzq/2TaJeMDfi0HBkuhuNBsUPxHkFBc7B0ccX7zcCCOTrZfv/Ly4xp/W0iftHaPkowOquiRe64mfUd0h4NDL4ik+kgHpmY7hxPVr0IyDaaQCqKVH3A3Nv+AIyVuu+deMHhRFE/5aj+bEEiMRuLHZcPrmg34toFe+9AALUo=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
 t=1728817193; c=relaxed/simple;
 bh=4J/B0p6DLrFY1CaiW5vBy7p+Xq0vtr3Yxu2gHUmcHDc=;
 h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Mime-Version:DKIM-Signature;
 b=jrY7ig7cN6TVTKJOKyvT6+qtbmFUx3B9v5vgEV4LH058RKChuWrVi9jH3UMDwm5WAWq70Wv5j47fEa5YHenc/M+C3wJCPYipCgNYc1CmzZH6L2mmwloc/d84N9Wt9UFiVN7jUwReKDuKe99lncHMlfgq/AUa2/EiTWOZB7T+sLw=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2024 19:59:45 +0900
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin 3.5.4-1: signal handling destroys 'long double' values
Message-Id: <20241013195945.8ffefdd9aaa6f08dbea8df7c@nifty.ne.jp>
In-Reply-To: <0784c8f3-ab93-670c-835e-ef7344d38701@t-online.de>
References: <922a6d7e-3ee1-9bb7-dfd7-b94c53a7b9d4 AT t-online DOT de>
 <20241008202057 DOT abd3dc5bb4df172c530e7655 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
 <79171662-eede-4b14-aaf4-ebd98e6d98de AT SystematicSW DOT ab DOT ca>
 <99f51137-2889-4985-b4c6-a460e05befb8 AT SystematicSW DOT ab DOT ca>
 <20241013081407 DOT f07402abe9f721924f461dcc AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
 <0784c8f3-ab93-670c-835e-ef7344d38701 AT t-online DOT de>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, BODY_8BITS,
 DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A,
 SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From: Takashi Yano via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender: "Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 49DB0MGb2871976

On Sun, 13 Oct 2024 11:55:46 +0200
Christian Franke wrote:
> Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> > Hi Brian,
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 10:37:14 -0600
> > Brian Inglis wrote:
> >> On 2024-10-08 10:14, Brian Inglis via Cygwin wrote:
> >>> On 2024-10-08 05:20, Takashi Yano via Cygwin wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 15:11:52 +0200
> >>>> Christian Franke wrote:
> >>>>> $ gcc -o sigtest -O2 sigtest.c
> >>>>>
> >>>>> $ ./sigtest > out.txt
> >>>>> (press ^C 42x :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> $ sort out.txt | uniq -c
> >>>>>          3 x = 0x1.23456789p+0, y = -nan, d = -nan
> >>>>>          6 x = 0x1.23456789p+0, y = 0x1.23456789p+0, d = -nan
> >>>>>         33 x = 0x1.23456789p+0, y = 0x1.23456789p+0, d = 0x0p+0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The problem also occurs if compiled without -O2, but less often. No
> >>>>> problem occurs if compiled with -DWORKS which suggests that only 'long
> >>>>> double' is affected.
> >>>> Thanks for the report. I looked into this problem and might find the
> >>>> cause. It seems due to a bug of scripts/gendef. It generates signal
> >>>> handler caller (sigfe.s) which stores/restores the registers.
> >>>>
> >>>> In sigdelayed, control word is stored/restored by fnstcw/fldcw instruction,
> >>>> however, fninit instruction destroys some status registers in FPU (x87).
> >>>>
> >>>> I think we shold use fnstenv/fldenv rather than fnstcw/fldcw and fninit.
> >>>> However, I'm not familiar with x87 instructions, so I may overlook
> >>>> something.
> >>>>
> >>>> Could anyone expert of x87 instructions and sigfe stuff give some
> >>>> comments?
> >>> AIUI x87 FP handling is outdated and mainly unused on current systems, as
> >>> current systems do more and use more than the legacy x87 instructions and stack.
> >>>
> >>> See https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/numeric/fenv and related docs for more
> >>> modern approaches.
> >>>
> >>> You would have to look into the AMD/Intel/IEEE docs for lower level details.
> >> This is basically what ISTR:
> >>
> >> https://beta.boost.org/doc/libs/1_82_0/libs/context/doc/html/context/rationale/x86_and_floating_point_env.html
> >>
> >> where legacy x87 and MMX registers are not used or preserved on x86_64/amd64, as
> >> SSE... instructions and XMM registers are used.
> > Thanks for the advice. I read throuh the web pages and related documents
> > and made a patch which uses fxsave/fxrstor and xsave/xrstror to
> > cygwin-patches AT cygwin DOT com mailing list.
> > https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-patches/2024q4/012804.html
> 
> The patch fixes the testcases from my original post on a CPU with XSAFE 
> support and also if usage of FXSAVE if forced by this hack:
> 
>          movl    \$1,%eax
>          cpuid
> -       andl    \$0x04000000,%ecx # xsave available?
> +       andl    \$0x00000000,%ecx # xsave available?
>          jnz     1f

Thanks for testing!

-- 
Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple