This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: What is consensus?
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> The more controversial point I make here is that we probably need to
> take a hard stand on build/testsuite regressions and simply revert any
> patches that break or regress the testsuite.
The way the libm tests work it's unavoidable that a newly added test will
typically fail on each architecture until the ulps baselines are updated,
since they are architecture-specific. I don't think we should expect
people to test on all architectures; we should state in such cases that
ulps updates that do not add unduly large ulps entries (any ulps at all
for functions that should be exact) are considered obvious. We should
also be liberal about conditioning out tests for particular floating-point
formats etc. if they show up bugs (always with a comment added pointing to
the bug in Bugzilla), for those cases where they show up an
architecture-specific problem that isn't being immediately fixed.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com