On 5/7/24 20:44, Toon Moene wrote:
On 5/7/24 20:35, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:31 AM Toon Moene wrote:
On 5/7/24 00:02, Toon Moene wrote:
OK, perhaps on the aarch64 I need the following option to make the
comparison fair:
‘rdma’
Enable Round Double Multiply
On 5/7/24 20:35, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:31 AM Toon Moene wrote:
On 5/7/24 00:02, Toon Moene wrote:
OK, perhaps on the aarch64 I need the following option to make the
comparison fair:
‘rdma’
Enable Round Double Multiply Accumulate instructions
On 5/7/24 00:02, Toon Moene wrote:
OK, perhaps on the aarch64 I need the following option to make the
comparison fair:
‘rdma’
Enable Round Double Multiply Accumulate instructions. This is on by
default for -march=armv8.1-a.
I.e., -mno-rdma
(I hope that's correct - I'll will try
On 5/6/24 23:35, Toon Moene wrote:
On 5/6/24 23:32, Andrew Pinski wrote:
Did you test x86_64 with -march=native (or with -mfma) or just -O3?
The reason why I am asking is aarch64 includes FMA by default while
x86_64 does not.
Most recent x86_64 includes an FMA instruction but since the base
it, it is not enabled by default.
I am suspect the aarch64 "excessive exceeding the threshold for
errors" are all caused by the more use of FMA rather than anything
else.
Aah, I forgot to include that tidbit, because its readily apparent from
the full logs - I compiled with *just* -O3.
Thanks,
--
l log file - there is more
information in it to zoom in on the errors on the aarch64 side (note
that the x86_64 side is not faultless).
Is there a way to pass this information to our websites, so that we do
not "forget" this - or in the alternative, follow the progress in
solving this ?
Kind
For better visibility to the Fortran crowd, I'll send this to the
Fortran mailing list.
See Richard Earnshaw's remark near the end of the message.
Kind regards,
Toon Moene.
On 2/19/24 14:16, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 19/02/2024 10:58, Tamar Christina wrote:
-Original Message
Forwarded Message
Subject: [PATCH] testsuite, gfortan: Update link flags [PR112862].
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2024 15:03:08 +
From: Iain Sandoe
Reply-To: i...@sandoe.co.uk
To: gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
CC: r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
Tested on i686, x86_64, aarch64 Darwin,
On 9/26/23 20:40, Toon Moene wrote:
On 9/26/23 09:30, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 5:17 PM Sylvain Noiry via Gcc
wrote:
As I said at the end of the presentation, we have written a paper which
explains
our implementation in details. You can find it on the wiki page
in there will be always used only by the same snapshot from the release
branch and so should be compatible with the LTO in it.
This might be an argument to make it a configure option, e.g.
--enable-lto-runtime.
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG
our .mod files.
But it would be a big win for Fortran ...
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
ot;lto-ing" run time libraries is more complicated
than just "whether it works" as those who attended the BoF will recall.
Hope this helps,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
a patch tracker (or at
least not a system where you submit patches to a thing vs emailing them to
a list and hoping someone replies).
Well, you can put patches into Bugzilla ...
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk
regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
o the
broader GCC development community what gfortran is used for, and how
*we* deal with their questions and problems (and, thus, how important
this part of the GNU Compiler *Collection* is).
Oh, BTW, I retire in nine months, which would give me loads of time to
deal with such a mailing list.
print *, associated(ptr, scalar)
end subroutine sub
end
!!!!!!!!
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
compilers differ in the
treatment of this case, there might be reason to ask the Fortran
Standard Committee for an Interpretation of the Standard ?
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Interesting question. We don't do that yet, as far as I know.
Forwarded Message
Subject: gfortran fp16
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 13:24:22 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
From: 陈刚
To: gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org
Dear experts,
I want to use fp16 in fortran, does gfortran support the fp16?
I
to ask the Fortran Standardization Committee for an interpretation
(of the standard's text).
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Hi All,
I know that most - if not all - of you do not follow the GCC Development
mailing list, so I'll forward the below message by the
Steering Committee.
In short: For anyone on this mailing list who already contributes to
gfortran and has a FSF copyright assignment, nothing changes.
For Your Information ...
Forwarded Message
Subject: GCC 11.0.1 Status Report (2021-03-16)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 12:19:20 +0100 (CET)
From: Richard Biener
Reply-To: g...@gcc.gnu.org
To: g...@gcc.gnu.org
CC: gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org
Status
==
GCC trunk which eventually
21 matches
Mail list logo
