public inbox for gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paweł Sikora" <pluto@agmk.net>
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: question about equivalent x87/x64-64 fpu code...
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 18:12:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201105132011.34453.pluto@agmk.net> (raw)

Hi,

i'm using a 3rd-party engine http://glaros.dtc.umn.edu/gkhome/metis/metis/overview
for partitioning some complex data. it worked fine for years until today (may 13)...

observations:
- the 32-bit metis build produces nice and balanced partitons.
- the 64-bit metis build produces bad and unbalanced partitons.

the metis' engine uses arrays of integers on the public interface and internally
some float-based and unsafe in terms of precison (x<y and x==y) operations.

so, i've built/tested following metis variants:

1). -m32 -march=pentium4 -O1                         - works fine.
2). -m32 -march=pentium4 -O1 -mfpmath=sse            - works fine.
3). -m64 -march=x86-64 -O1                           - bad/unbalanced partitions.
4). -m64 -march=x86-64 -O1 -mfpmath=387              - bad/unbalanced partitions.

at this point i've expected wrong results (< 80-bit precision) from variants 2/3
and good results from variants 1/4 but the real world differs.

next, i've isolated a one place in sources with float x<y stmt and changed it
to (x-y)<0.00001. with such change both native 1/3 variants give nice/equivalent results.

so, where is the problem? is the variants 1/4 really equivalent?

BR,
Paweł.

             reply	other threads:[~2011-05-13 18:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-13 18:12 Paweł Sikora [this message]
2011-05-16 11:03 ` Andrew Haley
2011-05-16 22:58   ` Pawel Sikora
2011-05-16 23:57     ` Andrew Haley

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=201105132011.34453.pluto@agmk.net \
    --to=pluto@agmk.net \
    --cc=gcc-help@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: link
Be 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).