Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Dec 96 18:51:02 +0000
From:      dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie
To:        FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject:   misc/2195: HAVE_FPU = yes produces buged libm
Message-ID:  <9612111851.aa08441@synge.maths.tcd.ie>
Resent-Message-ID: <199612111900.LAA29038@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

>Number:         2195
>Category:       misc
>Synopsis:       HAVE_FPU = yes produces buged libm
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
>State:          open
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Wed Dec 11 11:00:01 PST 1996
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     David Malone
>Organization:
Trinity College Dublin.
>Release:        FreeBSD 2.2
>Environment:

	Running FreeBSD-2.2 from ctm'ed sources on a intel pentium.

>Description:

	If you compile libm with HAVE_FPU=yes then the libm code
	seems messed up. 

>How-To-Repeat:

	Some code I have for a ray-tracer core dumps on certain
	input when libm is compiled with HAVE_FPU=yes. The stack
	seems pretty badly trashed, as gdb produces nothing
	sensible. If without recompiling you drop in a non-fpu
	libm then everything works fine.

	If anyone wants the code and input which causes the problem
	let me know - but I wasn't able to track it down and there
	is a fiar bit of code in use.

>Fix:
	
	Compile without HAVE_FPU=yes - maybe the option should be
	removed from /etc/make.conf

>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9612111851.aa08441>