@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
declared in the headers. */
#define _LIBC_TEST 1
#define __STDC_WANT_IEC_60559_TYPES_EXT__
+#include <errno.h>
#include <fenv.h>
#include <float.h>
#include <math.h>
@@ -205,7 +206,9 @@ struct test {
#define GEN_ONE_TEST(FSUF, FTYPE, FTOSTR, LSUF, CSUF) \
{ \
feclearexcept (FE_ALL_EXCEPT); \
+ errno = 0; \
FTYPE f = STRTO (FSUF) (s, NULL); \
+ int new_errno = errno; \
if (f != expected->FSUF \
|| (copysign ## CSUF) (1.0 ## LSUF, f) \
!= (copysign ## CSUF) (1.0 ## LSUF, expected->FSUF)) \
@@ -254,6 +257,14 @@ struct test {
printf ("ignoring this exception error\n"); \
} \
} \
+ if (overflow->FSUF && new_errno != ERANGE) \
+ { \
+ printf (FNPFXS "to" #FSUF \
+ " (" STRM ") left errno == %d," \
+ " not %d (ERANGE)\n", \
+ s, new_errno, ERANGE); \
+ result = 1; \
+ } \
} \
}
On Wed, 14 Aug 2024, Florian Weimer wrote: > Maybe print new_errno in the error message? Rest looks okay. Committed in the following form. Test errno setting on strtod overflow in tst-strtod-round We have no tests that errno is set to ERANGE on overflow of strtod-family functions (we do have some tests for underflow, in tst-strtod-underflow). Add such tests to tst-strtod-round. Tested for x86_64.