On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 21:52 +0200, Dan HorĂ¡k wrote:
On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 11:32:55 -0500
Steven Munroe <munroesj(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 18:08 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > On 09/06/2017 04:20 AM, Steven Munroe wrote:
> > >> * 970 with POWER6 tuning.
> > >> - Will not use DFP within glibc, but we have never used DFP in
> > >> glibc.
> > >>
> > > Yes but customer do use DFP, Just not the customers you have
> > > talked to.
> > >
> > > So why not build libdfp for 970 as base for emulation and power6
> > > with hardware DFP. You can alias the power6 libdfp for power7/8
> > >
> > > Then I am OK with skipping power6 for glibc.
> >
> > libdfp currently isn't Fedora. glibc doesn't use _Decimal, so I
> > don't see how these things are related.
> >
> > Would you please elaborate?
> >
> I though we here talking about a distro and supporting the platform.
> GLIBC is too narrow a topic.
>
> POWER supports IEEE754R Decimal Floating Point in Hardware, Since
> Power6 (2007).
>
> _Decimal is included in C14 and C17 standards.
>
> libdfp is NOT new (also circa 2007) And is included in RHEL6 RHEL7 and
> other enterprise distros (Supplement or extras)
>
>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_libdfp_li...
>
> We cant use the messed up BID code and format from X86. Which is
> software emulation only.
>
> So the question is: why doesn't Fedora build and ship libdfp.
weren't there any licensing issues originally? And later no one
volunteered to maintain it it seems :-(
GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1
Seems simple enough.
Yes we loss some continuity when Ryan took a new job, but Tulio and team
support libdfp now.
Dan