Skip to content

[snitch] NaN-box narrow FP loads (flw) in the LSU return path - #109

Merged
Smephite merged 3 commits into
pulp-platform:mainfrom
emiliengnr:fix-flw-nanboxing
Jul 24, 2026
Merged

[snitch] NaN-box narrow FP loads (flw) in the LSU return path#109
Smephite merged 3 commits into
pulp-platform:mainfrom
emiliengnr:fix-flw-nanboxing

Conversation

@emiliengnr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hello, here is a pull request for a bug I found.

flw does not NaN-box the loaded single-precision value. The FP LSU ties
fp_lsu_qsigned to 0, and the load return path gated NaN-boxing on
sign-extension ((data[msb] | NaNBox) & sign_ext), so the boxing was dropped
and flw zero-extended into the 64-bit FP register. When a later
double-precision instruction reads that register it sees an ordinary number
where the spec requires a NaN, and its result diverges from the reference.

The fix makes NaN-boxing unconditional in the load return path
((data[msb] & sign_ext) | NaNBox). It is bit-identical for the integer LSU
(NaNBox=0) and forces the upper bits to all-ones for the FP LSU.

@Smephite
Smephite force-pushed the fix-flw-nanboxing branch from f15f464 to 59a230a Compare July 23, 2026 13:14
@Smephite

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the PR!
I also observed similar issues in #123.

I took the liberty of adding some regression tests for your bug - please let me know if this is fine for you.

Currently, the PR is running on our internal CI, but after that passes: LGTM!

@Smephite Smephite self-assigned this Jul 24, 2026
@emiliengnr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hello!

Yes sure, no problem with the regression tests. Thanks for reviewing the PR!

@Smephite
Smephite force-pushed the fix-flw-nanboxing branch from 6660523 to 8b448e4 Compare July 24, 2026 14:09
@Smephite
Smephite merged commit 414b1ac into pulp-platform:main Jul 24, 2026
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants