-
Type:
Bug
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Priority:
P3
-
None
-
Affects Version/s: None
-
Component/s: core-libs
-
None
-
generic
-
generic
The original implementation of UMIN/UMAX reductions in JDK-8346174
used incorrect identity values in the Java fallback implementation
and test code.
Problem:
--------
UMIN was using MAX_OR_INF (signed maximum value) as the identity:
- Byte.MAX_VALUE (127) instead of max unsigned byte (255)
- Short.MAX_VALUE (32767) instead of max unsigned short (65535)
- Integer.MAX_VALUE instead of max unsigned int (-1)
- Long.MAX_VALUE instead of max unsigned long (-1)
UMAX was using MIN_OR_INF (signed minimum value) as the identity:
- Byte.MIN_VALUE (-128) instead of 0
- Short.MIN_VALUE (-32768) instead of 0
- Integer.MIN_VALUE instead of 0
- Long.MIN_VALUE instead of 0
This caused incorrect result. For example:
UMAX([42,42,...,42]) returned 128 instead of 42
used incorrect identity values in the Java fallback implementation
and test code.
Problem:
--------
UMIN was using MAX_OR_INF (signed maximum value) as the identity:
- Byte.MAX_VALUE (127) instead of max unsigned byte (255)
- Short.MAX_VALUE (32767) instead of max unsigned short (65535)
- Integer.MAX_VALUE instead of max unsigned int (-1)
- Long.MAX_VALUE instead of max unsigned long (-1)
UMAX was using MIN_OR_INF (signed minimum value) as the identity:
- Byte.MIN_VALUE (-128) instead of 0
- Short.MIN_VALUE (-32768) instead of 0
- Integer.MIN_VALUE instead of 0
- Long.MIN_VALUE instead of 0
This caused incorrect result. For example:
UMAX([42,42,...,42]) returned 128 instead of 42
- caused by
-
JDK-8346174 UMAX/UMIN are missing from XXXVector::reductionOperations
-
- Resolved
-