This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2019年07月01日 17:39 by vstinner, last changed 2022年04月11日 14:59 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| fp_except.c | vstinner, 2019年07月29日 23:34 | |||
| Pull Requests | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| URL | Status | Linked | Edit |
| PR 16515 | merged | vstinner, 2019年10月01日 10:45 | |
| Messages (11) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg347048 - (view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月01日 17:39 | |
Just after calling _PyRuntime_Initialize(), Py_Main() calls: /* 754 requires that FP exceptions run in "no stop" mode by default, * and until C vendors implement C99's ways to control FP exceptions, * Python requires non-stop mode. Alas, some platforms enable FP * exceptions by default. Here we disable them. */ #ifdef __FreeBSD__ fedisableexcept(FE_OVERFLOW); #endif It's done before calling Py_Initialize(). So applications embedding Python don't call it. But "customized Python" which call the new Py_RunMain() with Py_InititializeFromConfig() will not call it neither. I would like to know if this setup code should be moved into Py_Initialize()? Especially into the new PyConfig API: https://docs.python.org/dev/c-api/init_config.html PyConfig got 2 flags to control parameters which affect the whole process: * configure_c_stdio * configure_locale What is the behavior on FreeBSD when fedisableexcept(FE_OVERFLOW) is not called? Note: I'm not sure why this call is only needed on FreeBSD, but not on macOS, OpenBSD or NetBSD (operating systems close to FreeBSD). |
|||
| msg347226 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月03日 12:43 | |
> What is the behavior on FreeBSD when fedisableexcept(FE_OVERFLOW) is not called? That's an excellent question, that I'd love to have an answer to for currently supported FreeBSD versions. I think the old behaviour is that anything that you'd expect to raise an FPE (e.g., `math.sqrt(-1.0)` would segfault the interpreter). It may be that that's no longer an issue with FreeBSD versions that we care about. That code comment dates from over 16 years ago (see https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/4643bd9a9cf43332992d10982c52debf3f0d980c), so there's some hope that the situation's changed since then. |
|||
| msg347228 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月03日 12:49 | |
The current FreeBSD documentation for fedisableexcept says: > All exceptions are masked by default. Source: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=fedisableexcept&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+12.0-RELEASE+and+Ports&arch=default&format=html So it looks as though it may be safe to remove this. |
|||
| msg348696 - (view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月29日 23:09 | |
> The current FreeBSD documentation for fedisableexcept says: All exceptions are masked by default. The fedisableexcept manual page says that since this manual page was added to FreeBSD 6.0 which was released in 2005. Python started to tune FPU control on FreeBSD in 2002. Should I understand that fedisableexcept(FE_OVERFLOW) is useless since FreeBSD 6? I'm also surprised that I never saw any complain about that on other BSD: OpenBSD, NetBSD, macOS, etc. It seems like the fedisableexcept(FE_OVERFLOW) call is useless since a long time. |
|||
| msg348698 - (view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月29日 23:34 | |
fp_except.c: C program to test for float point exceptions: * FE_OVERFLOW * FE_UNDERFLOW * FE_INVALID I prefer to avoid testing FE_INEXACT which a test might be too specific to an implementation of the libm. I also chose to avoid testing FE_DIVBYZERO, since the default behavior is to kill the process with SIGFPE. |
|||
| msg348723 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月30日 08:58 | |
> Should I understand that fedisableexcept(FE_OVERFLOW) is useless since FreeBSD 6? That's my understanding, yes. And since it was only introduced in FreeBSD 6, it's been useless forever. IOW, I think it's true that this line of code, in its current form, hasn't ever had any effect. |
|||
| msg348724 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月30日 08:59 | |
> And since it was only introduced Sorry, that was unclear. "it" refers to "fedisableexcept" in the above. |
|||
| msg348725 - (view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月30日 09:01 | |
Mark: Do you think that it's worth it to convert attached fp_except.c into tests run by test_float, to check floating point exceptions in Python? |
|||
| msg348727 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年07月30日 09:09 | |
> Mark: Do you think that it's worth it to convert attached fp_except.c into > tests run by test_float, to check floating point exceptions in Python? Sure, it wouldn't harm. I'd expect that all these cases are already being tested indirectly by some part of test_math, but direct tests are better. Note that Python still can't/won't assume IEEE 754 floating-point, so if the tests use special values like infinities and nans, or other IEEE 754 assumptions, then they should be guarded by a suitable "skipIf" decorator. |
|||
| msg353671 - (view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年10月01日 11:12 | |
New changeset 5e0ea7540f577c9684e272000fdfc80d29bb78a2 by Victor Stinner in branch 'master': bpo-37474: Don't call fedisableexcept() on FreeBSD (GH-16515) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/5e0ea7540f577c9684e272000fdfc80d29bb78a2 |
|||
| msg353672 - (view) | Author: STINNER Victor (vstinner) * (Python committer) | Date: 2019年10月01日 11:14 | |
Sorry, I failed to find time to convert attached tests to tests in the Python test suite. But I understood that existing tests should be enough to control the rounding mode. I removed the call. If something goes wrong, we can add it back. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022年04月11日 14:59:17 | admin | set | github: 81655 |
| 2019年10月01日 11:14:10 | vstinner | set | status: open -> closed resolution: fixed messages: + msg353672 stage: patch review -> resolved |
| 2019年10月01日 11:12:32 | vstinner | set | messages: + msg353671 |
| 2019年10月01日 10:45:17 | vstinner | set | keywords:
+ patch stage: patch review pull_requests: + pull_request16105 |
| 2019年07月30日 09:09:02 | mark.dickinson | set | messages: + msg348727 |
| 2019年07月30日 09:01:36 | vstinner | set | messages: + msg348725 |
| 2019年07月30日 08:59:20 | mark.dickinson | set | messages: + msg348724 |
| 2019年07月30日 08:58:13 | mark.dickinson | set | messages: + msg348723 |
| 2019年07月29日 23:34:12 | vstinner | set | files:
+ fp_except.c messages: + msg348698 |
| 2019年07月29日 23:09:22 | vstinner | set | messages: + msg348696 |
| 2019年07月03日 12:49:29 | mark.dickinson | set | messages: + msg347228 |
| 2019年07月03日 12:43:55 | mark.dickinson | set | nosy:
+ tim.peters |
| 2019年07月03日 12:43:33 | mark.dickinson | set | messages: + msg347226 |
| 2019年07月01日 17:39:03 | vstinner | create | |