public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
@ 2021-11-18 16:29 meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:30 ` [Bug regression/103320] " meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-18 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103320
Bug ID: 103320
Summary: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: regression
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r compiles fine but produces the wrong output when
compiled with -Ofast options on both power9 and power10. In going back with
the previous runs that I've done on power10, it worked with sources checked out
on October 17th, but failed with sources checked out on November 4th and
November 17th.
I used the options:
-g -mlittle -save-temps=obj -ffast-math -Ofast -mcpu=power10 -mrecip \
-funroll-loops -m64 -finline-arg-packing -static-libgfortran \
-fstack-arrays -std=legacy -frandom-seed=spec2017
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug regression/103320] Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
2021-11-18 16:29 [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-18 16:30 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:31 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-18 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103320
Michael Meissner <meissner at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |segher at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
Severity|normal |major
Priority|P3 |P2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug regression/103320] Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
2021-11-18 16:29 [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:30 ` [Bug regression/103320] " meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-18 16:31 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-19 7:38 ` [Bug target/103320] 12 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-18 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103320
Michael Meissner <meissner at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P2 |P1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug target/103320] 12 Regression] Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
2021-11-18 16:29 [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:30 ` [Bug regression/103320] " meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:31 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-19 7:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-30 15:58 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-09 7:04 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-19 7:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103320
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|regression |target
Target| |powerpc64le
Summary|Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r |12 Regression] Spec 2017
|fails on PowerPC for -Ofast |benchmark roms_r fails on
| |PowerPC for -Ofast
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug target/103320] 12 Regression] Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
2021-11-18 16:29 [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-19 7:38 ` [Bug target/103320] 12 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-30 15:58 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-09 7:04 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-30 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103320
Michael Meissner <meissner at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner <meissner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Note, roms_r is not compatible with -Ofast or -ffast-math unless you use the
-fno-unsafe-math-optimizations option. I'm going to close the bug since I've
adjusted my scripts to add that option to roms_r (and perlbench_r which also
needs it).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug target/103320] 12 Regression] Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast
2021-11-18 16:29 [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-30 15:58 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-06-09 7:04 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-06-09 7:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103320
Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I also met this issue recently, not sure if roms_r's failure has the same root
cause with what we have for perlbench_r, perlbench_r's page [1] highlights the
option "-fno-unsafe-math-optimizations " while roms_r's [2] doesn't. One thing
to note is that without -funroll-loops roms_r's verification can pass. Maybe
it's a good idea to reopen this for more investigation?
[1] https://www.spec.org/cpu2017/Docs/benchmarks/500.perlbench_r.html
[2] https://www.spec.org/cpu2017/Docs/benchmarks/554.roms_r.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-06-09 7:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-11-18 16:29 [Bug regression/103320] New: Spec 2017 benchmark roms_r fails on PowerPC for -Ofast meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:30 ` [Bug regression/103320] " meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-18 16:31 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-19 7:38 ` [Bug target/103320] 12 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-30 15:58 ` meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-09 7:04 ` linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
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).