ucb-bar / ucb-bar/berkeley-hardfloat
Is Recoded Format more hardware-friendly for denormal numbers than IEEE754 format?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Scala
- Stars
- 393
- Forks
- 111
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I'm trying to design my own FPU but I find that supporting denormal numbers would add huge delay to the hardware logic. So I'm wondering is recoded format able to reduce some delay when dealing with denormal numbers ? Since I find that the biggest difference between recoded format and ieee754 is in denormal numbers. Could you please share some information, like the synthesis results ? Thanks!
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no files, tests, or entry points. Start by reviewing the project's recoded-format and IEEE754 handling, then compare synthesis results for denormal-number paths; done means an evidence-based answer about hardware delay.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- scala
- Domain
- embedded-iot
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100