Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 09:32:57 -0700 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Optimization bug with floating-point? Message-ID: <e290b68f-7a1d-2456-4a0c-9f7dfd303f55@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20190313151635.GA34757@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20190313024506.GA31746@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20190313151635.GA34757@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/13/19 8:16 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 07:45:41PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>
>> gcc8 --version
>> gcc8 (FreeBSD Ports Collection) 8.3.0
>>
>> gcc8 -fno-builtin -o z a.c -lm && ./z
>> gcc8 -O -fno-builtin -o z a.c -lm && ./z
>> gcc8 -O2 -fno-builtin -o z a.c -lm && ./z
>> gcc8 -O3 -fno-builtin -o z a.c -lm && ./z
>>
>> Max ULP: 2.297073
>> Count: 0 (# of ULP that exceed 21)
>>
>
> clang agrees with gcc8 if one changes ...
>
>> int
>> main(void)
>> {
>> double re, im, u, ur, ui;
>> float complex f;
>> float x, y;
>
> this line to "volatile float x, y".
So it seems to be a regression in clang 7 vs clang 6?
--
John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e290b68f-7a1d-2456-4a0c-9f7dfd303f55>