public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libfortran/59774] [Regression] Inconsistent rounding between -m32 and -m64 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 22:50:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-59774-4-040YqvBEax@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-59774-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59774 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> --- I have opened pr59836 for the wrong outputs in comments 0 and 9 with a patch which fixes them plus others I have found while debugging. This new patch does not require the kludge in comment 9. I repost the patch fixing the issue of this PR, i.e., the inconsistent rounding, without the patch for pr59771: --- ../_clean/libgfortran/io/write_float.def 2014-01-04 15:51:53.000000000 +0100 +++ libgfortran/io/write_float.def 2014-01-15 23:33:51.000000000 +0100 @@ -1018,13 +1018,14 @@ output_float_FMT_G_ ## x (st_parameter_d int d = f->u.real.d;\ int w = f->u.real.w;\ fnode newf;\ - GFC_REAL_ ## x rexp_d, r = 0.5;\ + GFC_REAL_ ## x rexp_d, r = 0.5, r_sc;\ int low, high, mid;\ int ubound, lbound;\ char *p, pad = ' ';\ int save_scale_factor, nb = 0;\ bool result;\ int nprinted, precision;\ + volatile GFC_REAL_ ## x temp;\ \ save_scale_factor = dtp->u.p.scale_factor;\ \ @@ -1043,8 +1044,10 @@ output_float_FMT_G_ ## x (st_parameter_d break;\ }\ \ - rexp_d = calculate_exp_ ## x (-d);\ - if ((m > 0.0 && ((m < 0.1 - 0.1 * r * rexp_d) || (rexp_d * (m + r) >= 1.0)))\ + rexp_d = calculate_exp_ ## x (d);\ + r_sc = (1 - r / rexp_d);\ + temp = 0.1 * r_sc;\ + if ((m > 0.0 && ((m < temp) || (r >= (rexp_d - m))))\ || ((m == 0.0) && !(compile_options.allow_std\ & (GFC_STD_F2003 | GFC_STD_F2008))))\ { \ @@ -1066,10 +1069,9 @@ output_float_FMT_G_ ## x (st_parameter_d \ while (low <= high)\ { \ - volatile GFC_REAL_ ## x temp;\ mid = (low + high) / 2;\ \ - temp = (calculate_exp_ ## x (mid - 1) * (1 - r * rexp_d));\ + temp = (calculate_exp_ ## x (mid - 1) * r_sc);\ \ if (m < temp)\ { \ Besides some cleaning, it computes '0.1 - 0.1 * r * rexp_d' through a volatile 'temp', as it is done later, and computes 'rexp_d * (m + r) >= 1.0' as r >= (rexp_d - m) (Note that the new rexp_d=10**d and is the inverse of the old one). The reason of the second change is that 'r' is 0.0, 0.5, or 1.0, i.e., stored without rounding, as well as the new rexp_d (at least for small values of 'd', d<11 for real(4)). So the threshold will trigger only when 'regxp_d-m' is close to one, i.e., when the difference will lose accuracy and not be affected by rounding. I have collected all (most of) the tests in pr48906, pr59771, and pr59836 in a single file and with the patch there is no differences between the output with -m32 or -m64. The patch retested cleanly also.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-15 22:50 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-01-12 0:56 [Bug libfortran/59774] New: " jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-12 1:36 ` [Bug libfortran/59774] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-12 1:48 ` [Bug libfortran/59774] [Regression] " jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-12 2:07 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-12 3:59 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-12 15:06 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-12 15:35 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-12 16:15 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-12 16:25 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-14 22:29 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-15 5:26 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-15 22:50 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr [this message] 2014-01-16 9:31 ` [Bug libfortran/59774] [4.8/4.9 Regression] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-18 14:36 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-01-19 23:18 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-19 23:21 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-01-31 10:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-11 9:28 ` [Bug libfortran/59774] [4.8 " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-02-15 15:49 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-15 15:58 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-15 16:55 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-02-15 17:27 ` jvdelisle 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-59774-4-040YqvBEax@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).