aarch64 testresults of r14-7229 fails math/cmplx in the libgo tests.

aarch64 testresults of r14-7229 fails math/cmplx in the libgo tests.

[Toon Moene]

Hi to the AARCH64 team,

I managed to do a (bog-standard normal) bootstrap on my Aarch64 system.

See: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2024-January/805347.html

It got this for the libgo tests:

		=== libgo tests ===


Running target unix
FAIL: math/cmplx

		=== libgo Summary ===

# of expected passes		195
# of unexpected failures	1
/dev/shm/bld2283/./gcc/gccgo version 14.0.1 20240114 (experimental) 
[master r14-7229-ged5bf2080c5] (GCC)

Subsequently, I ran LAPACK's test programs (using lapack-3.11.0) with 
optimization options -O3 -march=native -mtune=native, and I got the 
following differences with respect to the same run using gfortran 13 as 
installed on Debian testing (updated last Saturday):

diff thunderx-gfortran13.txt thunderx-gfortran14.txt
...
201,204c341,344
< REAL             	1306803		30	(0.002%)	0	(0.000%)	
< DOUBLE PRECISION	1318331		56	(0.004%)	4	(0.000%)	
< COMPLEX          	770551		298	(0.039%)	0	(0.000%)	
< COMPLEX16         	779394		98	(0.013%)	0	(0.000%)	
---
 > REAL             	1317063		71	(0.005%)	0	(0.000%)	
 > DOUBLE PRECISION	1318331		54	(0.004%)	4	(0.000%)	
 > COMPLEX          	767023		390	(0.051%)	0	(0.000%)	
 > COMPLEX16         	174950		41371	(23.647%)	64	(0.037%)	
206c346
< --> ALL PRECISIONS	4175079		482	(0.012%)	4	(0.000%)	
---
 > --> ALL PRECISIONS	3577367		41886	(1.171%)	68	(0.002%)

Note that the only differences are in COMPLEX16 (i.e., complex 
computations using 64 bit REAL and IMAGINARY parts).
Perhaps the failing libgo test case is sufficient to track this down ... 
I suppose you can reproduce that one more easily.

Kind regards,

-- 
Toon Moene - e-mail: toon@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands