public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
Subject: Re: c++/6914: -O2 and -O give different results for the same valid FP code
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 06:36:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020603133606.28728.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

The following reply was made to PR c++/6914; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org>
To: veksler@il.ibm.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
	gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: c++/6914: -O2 and -O give different results for the same valid FP code
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 06:30:53 -0700

 On Monday 03 June 2002 06:09, Michael Veksler wrote:
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&
 >pr=6914
 >
 > So here are my conclusions (after reading the assembly, and running gdb
 > on it):
 > Floating point on x86 is done on 80 bit registers (IEEE's double
 > extended type).
 > GCC generates code to exploit all 80 bits during divide. It then spills
 > the result
 > to memory.
 >
 > The second divide is not spilled to memory, and the comparison is done
 > between truncated value (which lost accuracy), and a completely accurate
 > 80 bit
 > value.
 > According to http://www.validlab.com/goldberg/paper.ps this does not
 > seem right.
 > According to this paper, gcc should operate on double precision (64
 > bit), or at
 > least give the impression that it does so (to the outside viewer). But
 > gcc operates
 > on a mixed 80/64 bit setting, and that seems contradictory to IEEE spirit
 > (and, probably, agains ISO C rules).
 >
 Among the remedies available would be 
 a) set 53-bit rounding mode
 b) choose -msse2, for appropriate targets
 
 -- 
 Tim Prince


             reply	other threads:[~2002-06-03 13:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-06-03  6:36 Tim Prince [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-06-03 23:56 Michael Veksler
2002-06-03  9:26 Franz Sirl
2002-06-03  8:56 Michael Veksler
2002-06-03  6:16 Michael Veksler
2002-06-03  4:46 Michael Veksler

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=20020603133606.28728.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=tprince@computer.org \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nobody@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).