public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c and pr95115.c Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 13:19:26 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-107608-4-tMRLwDSb6H@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-107608-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107608 --- Comment #29 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #27) > "elide an overflow" should be probably "elide an overflow or division by > zero" I think, > because finite / 0.0 returns infinity and raises FE_DIVBYZERO rather than > FE_OVERFLOW, > even when it returns infinity from finite operands. > Seems for infinity / 0.0 no exception is raised, so the finite operands > infinite result condition seems to be sufficient. Fixed. > > For GCC 13, I think it is important that we e.g. don't miscompile glibc > libm, so > the libm testsuite should be clean. PR107967 fixed some of the failures, > and some were claimed to be dups of this PR. So, would be nice to test GCC > with your patch on glibc + libm testsuite. > Just > CC=/path/to/patched-gcc-trunk/gcc CXX=/path/to/patched-gcc-trunk/g++ > ../configure --prefix=/usr > CC=/path/to/patched-gcc-trunk/gcc CXX=/path/to/patched-gcc-trunk/g++ make -jN > CC=/path/to/patched-gcc-trunk/gcc CXX=/path/to/patched-gcc-trunk/g++ make > -jN check > should be enough in latest glibc (and perhaps compare that to GCC 12). I ran tests on glibc from git sources and compared the tests.sum files left behind from a "make check -k -jN". There don't seem to be any regressions. For that matter, it looks like a handful of tests get fixed by the proposed patch: -FAIL: math/test-double-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-double-log1p -FAIL: math/test-float-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-float-log1p -FAIL: math/test-float128-catan -FAIL: math/test-float128-catanh -FAIL: math/test-float128-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-float128-log -FAIL: math/test-float128-log1p -FAIL: math/test-float128-y0 -FAIL: math/test-float128-y1 -FAIL: math/test-float32-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-float32-log1p -FAIL: math/test-float32x-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-float32x-log1p -FAIL: math/test-float64-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-float64-log1p -FAIL: math/test-float64x-lgamma -FAIL: math/test-ldouble-lgamma
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-13 13:19 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-11-10 9:47 [Bug tree-optimization/107608] New: [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-10 9:49 ` [Bug tree-optimization/107608] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-10 13:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-10 18:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-11 7:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-13 6:30 ` [Bug tree-optimization/107608] [13 Regression] Failure on fold-overflow-1.c and pr95115.c xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-28 10:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-05 13:22 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-05 15:14 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-05 16:30 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-16 13:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-16 13:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-09 15:18 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 8:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 8:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 10:20 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 10:25 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 11:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 11:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 12:08 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2023-01-10 14:14 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 14:25 ` amacleod at redhat dot com 2023-01-10 14:33 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 14:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 14:40 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-10 14:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-12 11:42 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-12 12:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-12 12:26 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-13 13:19 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-01-13 13:25 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-15 15:43 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-16 21:38 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com 2023-01-16 21:46 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-16 21:55 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com 2023-01-16 21:58 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-18 12:26 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-18 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-18 12:56 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-18 13:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-18 13:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-18 13:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-19 1:15 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-19 7:17 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2023-01-26 14:29 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-27 7:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-27 7:59 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-27 9:53 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2023-01-27 10:02 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-27 10:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-27 11:30 ` rguenther at suse dot de
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-107608-4-tMRLwDSb6H@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).