public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/102930] New: equal values appear to be different due to missing correct rounding in libc Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 13:43:26 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-102930-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102930 Bug ID: 102930 Summary: equal values appear to be different due to missing correct rounding in libc Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net Target Milestone: --- Due to missing correct rounding in libc, expressions like sin(x) may give different values at compile time and at run time. With GCC optimization, this makes equal values appear to be different (e.g. an integer variable having two different values at the same time). Here's a testcase, inspired by PR85957 Comment 7 (which was about the x87 extended precision). #include <stdio.h> #include <math.h> #define D1 0x1.005023d32fee5p+1 #define D2 0x0.2ef652eba3771p-1 __attribute__((noinline,noclone)) static double opaque(void) { return D1; } __attribute__((noinline,noclone)) static void t1(void) { double a = D1, b = opaque(); if (a != b) printf("uneq"); double sa = sin(a), sb = sin(b); printf("t1: %a %s %a\n", sa, sa == sb ? "==" : "!=", sb); } __attribute__((noinline,noclone)) static void t2(void) { double a = D1, b = opaque(); if (a != b) printf("uneq"); int ia = sin(a) + D2, ib = sin(b) + D2; printf("t2: %d %s %d\n", ia, ia == ib ? "==" : "!=", ib); } __attribute__((noinline,noclone)) static void t3(void) { double a = D1, b = opaque(); if (a != b) printf("uneq"); int ia = sin(a) + D2, ib = sin(b) + D2; printf("t3: ib = %d\n", ib); if (ia == ib) printf("t3: ib = %d\n", ib); } int main(void) { t1(); t2(); t3(); return 0; } Compile with the following options: -O2 -lm -fdisable-tree-dom3 This gives: t1: 0x1.d109ad145c88fp-1 == 0x1.d109ad145c88ep-1 t2: 1 == 0 t3: ib = 0 t3: ib = 1 Tested GCC versions under Debian/unstable: * gcc-8 (Debian 8.4.0-7) 8.4.0 * gcc-9 (Debian 9.4.0-3) 9.4.0 * gcc-10 (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0 * gcc-11 (Debian 11.2.0-10) 11.2.0 * gcc (Debian 20210918-1) 12.0.0 20210918 (experimental) [master r12-3644-g7afcb534239] If -fdisable-tree-dom3 is not provided, t1 still fails with GCC 8 to 11.
next reply other threads:[~2021-10-25 13:43 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-25 13:43 vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net [this message] 2021-10-25 13:51 ` [Bug middle-end/102930] " vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2021-10-25 13:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-25 14:01 ` vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net 2021-10-26 0:59 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2021-10-26 7:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-102930-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).