From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id D23493858429; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:47:35 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D23493858429
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1665740855;
	bh=hHINhBc8uaU4bbTwpTUlGNaoBgrUgMaq/7mms1QM5Fc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=tc25jNDLBJSGyHjMMoTMAsavMvvGWcZvo2PIiY96sqQEDwokwLF+IAXGUupYFPPh4
	 jIl9quKehGR/OORvdhchZ/K4+AqwgenvE2ePyIoNHPQXEvAfAVNcHUELy1yTtKnBg7
	 faGGPCkm6c30Yx12bCujeIS5wXikLJhLgvNfJd2s=
From: "vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/106165] incorrect result when using inlined asm
 implementation of floor() on i686
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:47:33 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: inline-asm, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: DUPLICATE
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-106165-4-EzFO7ODc1r@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106165-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106165-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106165

Vincent Lef=C3=A8vre <vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot =
net

--- Comment #6 from Vincent Lef=C3=A8vre <vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net> ---
(In reply to xeioex from comment #5)
> My question is more practical. For example while
> `-fexcess-precision=3Dstandard` fixes the problem in GCC. But, I am left =
with
> the same problem regarding other compilers.

The need for -fexcess-precision=3Dstandard is due to a "bug" in GCC (more
precisely, a non-conformance issue with the ISO C standard). If the other
compilers conform to the C standard by default, you won't have to do anythi=
ng.

Note that even with -fexcess-precision=3Dstandard, you get double rounding,=
 i.e.
a first rounding to extended precision, then a second rounding to double
precision. This is allowed by the C standard, but may break some algorithms=
 or
give results different from platforms with a single rounding.=