On 10/14/2015 11:36 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:32:52AM -0400, Tim Prince wrote:
>> Sorry if someone sees this multiple times; I think it may have been
>> stopped by ISP or text mode filtering:
>>
>> Since Sept. 26, the partial support for Wind
.
--
Tim Prince
-funsafe-math-optimizations then
it should flip it back onto fast?
That seems reasonable.
I do see an improvement in several benchmarks by use of fma when I
append -ffp-contract=fast after -std=c99
Thanks.
--
Tim Prince
On 2/17/2014 4:42 AM, Renato Golin wrote:
On 16 February 2014 23:44, Tim Prince n...@aol.com wrote:
I don't think many people want to use both OpenMP 4 and older Intel
directives together.
I'm having less and less incentives to use anything other than omp4,
cilk and whatever. I think we
think gcc supports those only by explicit intrinsics.
I don't think many people want to use both OpenMP 4 and older Intel
directives together.
Several of these directives are still in an embryonic stage in both
Intel and gnu compilers.
--
Tim Prince
be considered or
-fno-strict-aliasing has to be set, I'm not about to second such a motion.
--
Tim Prince
On 2/7/2014 11:09 AM, Tim Prince wrote:
On 02/07/2014 10:22 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 05:21:00PM -0500, Tim Prince wrote:
I'm seeing vectorization but no output from
-ftree-vectorizer-verbose, and no dot product vectorization inside
omp parallel regions, with gcc g
On 02/07/2014 10:22 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 05:21:00PM -0500, Tim Prince wrote:
I'm seeing vectorization but no output from
-ftree-vectorizer-verbose, and no dot product vectorization inside
omp parallel regions, with gcc g++ or gfortran 4.9. Primary targets
this was posted on gcc list on account of such questions being ignored
on gcc-help.
--
Tim Prince
='c
c++ fortran' --enable-libgomp --enable-threads=posix
--disable-libmudflap --disa
ble-__cxa_atexit --with-dwarf2 --without-libiconv-prefix
--without-libintl-prefi
x --with-system-zlib
--
Tim Prince
-512 registers in the ifort compilation (/arch:MIC-AVX512) to avoid
those spills and repeated memory operands in the gfortran avx2 compilation.
How small a ratio of floating point to total instructions can you call
real Fortran?
--
Tim Prince
are more frequently
unaligned. In fact, parallel for simd seems to perform nearly the same
with gcc-4.9 as with icc.
Many decisions on compiler defaults still are based on an unscientific
choice of benchmarks, with gcc evidently more responsive to input from
the community.
--
Tim Prince
implementation).
I'll be discussing in a meeting later today my effort to publish
material including discussion of OpenMP 4.0 implementations.
--
Tim Prince
to conclusions, or accept other benchmarks as
giving the complete picture.
Agreed.
--
Tim Prince
.
I will try to optimize Moshier's SIN function later on.
Well I will be surprised if you can find significant
optimizations to that very clever routine. Certainly
you have to be a floating-point expert to even touch it!
Robert Dewar
--
Tim Prince
to -mfpmath=sse.
--
Tim Prince
in not making such replacements as a default in
violation of C specification.
--
Tim Prince
explicitly split (64-bit) loads, but the architecture manuals
disagree with this finding. gcc already does a good job for corei7[-1]
in such situations.
--
Tim Prince
with the compiler.
Normally, this means you didn't install the optional (32-bit)
glibc-devel i386.
--
Tim Prince
+kOkfeSQ+AvkWghU=
=snlv
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Surely someone has pointed out, you should require only to sort the file
by placing the dimension statement ahead of the data statement, if you
don't wish to adopt more modern syntax.
--
Tim Prince
, which is important but difficult to follow.
It's nearly impossible to compare icc and gcc optimization other than by
examining assembly and using a profiler which shows paths taken.
--
Tim Prince
return x==y ? x+y : x-y;
--
Tim Prince
a specific OS family in mind?
--
Tim Prince
thought the 64-bit pow() was OK.
Andrew.
No problems seen under elefunt with glibc 2.12 x86_64.
--
Tim Prince
-0.11102230E-15)**(-0.18014399E+17)
differs from correct value by -0.34413050E-08
This much error may spoil calculations such as compounded interest.
--
Tim Prince
about the quality of math libraries present; it doesn't
even take into account whether it's glibc or something else.
--
Tim Prince
to a bug in the
cpu instruction FPREM1
Kind Regards
James
As I recall, the remaindering instruction was documented as using a
66-bit rounded approximation fo PI, in case that is what you refer to.
--
Tim Prince
of this linux license:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/Non-Commercial-license/?wapkw=%28non-commercial+license%29
It isn't supported in the gcc context. Needless to say, I don't speak
for my employer.
--
Tim Prince
-vectorization of sum reduction.
If you do want gcc -fcx-limited range, icc spells it -complex-limited-range.
--
Tim Prince
situation may be useful.
--
Tim Prince
ULP.
--
Tim Prince
machinery, but I haven't seen it
used for vectorization. In a simple case like this, some might argue
there's no reason to write a backward loop when it could easily be
reversed in source code, and compilers have been seen to make mistakes
in reversal.
--
Tim Prince
, but that could be an accident.
At this point, I'd like to congratulate the developers for the progress
already evident in 4.6.
--
Tim Prince
On 1/21/2011 10:43 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
Hi,
SInce -O3 turns on vectorizer, should it also turn on
-funroll-loops?
Only if a conservative default value for max-unroll-times is set 2=
value = 4
--
Tim Prince
:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg00295.html
There are no libstdc++ results in that.
Richard.
This is true. I always run make check-gcc. What should I be doing instead?
make -k check
make check-c++ runs both g++ and libstdc++-v3 testsuites.
--
Tim Prince
which you add. How is this topic appropriate to gcc mail list?
--
Tim Prince
/gas.html ?
--
Tim Prince
into multiple steps in order to deal with command line length
limits. I would suggest adapting that. Can't study it myself now while
travelling.
--
Tim Prince
on the
value of PATH when running the compiler.
Ian
Is it reasonable to assume when the configure test reports using GNU
linker, it has taken that exception, even without a --with-ld
specification?
--
Tim Prince
, but no summary of the results.
--
Tim Prince
On 4/8/2010 2:40 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
On 07/04/2010 19:47, Tim Prince wrote:
Will there be a notification if and when C++ run-time will be ready to
test on secondary platforms, or will platforms like cygwin be struck
from the secondary list?
What exactly are you talking about
.
--
Tim Prince
for
cygwin gcc/gfortran, didn't know of any other supported languages worth
testing.
My ia64 box died a few months ago, but suse-linux surely was at least as
popular as unknown-linux in recent years.
--
Tim Prince
starts with operands
in memory (but you mention the case following an addition).
--
Tim Prince
vectorizing or not,
on an 8 core CPU, the OpenMP introduced in gcc 4.2 would be useful.
This looks like a gcc-help mail list question, which is where you should
submit any follow-up.
--
Tim Prince
, -mtune=barcelona
would not be consistently good, and you could not use -msse4 or -xSSE4.2.
For optimization which observes standards and also disables vectorized
sum reduction, you would omit -ffast-math for gcc, and set icc -fp-model
source.
--
Tim Prince
-fortran, make check-g++
separately. Perhaps a script could be made which would detect when the
build is complete, then submit the separate make check serial jobs together.
--
Tim Prince
have been more appropriate for gcc-help, if
related to gcc, or maybe comp.lang.c, if a question about implementation
in accordance with standard C.
--
Tim Prince
for those 64-bit targets.
--
Tim Prince
trouble with it. I do find your
observation interesting.
As far as I know, the oldest distro which works well on Core I7 is
RHEL5.2 x86_64, which I run, with updated gcc and binutils, and HT
disabled, as I never run applications which could benefit from HT.
--
Tim Prince
Steve White wrote:
I was under the misconception that each of these SSE operatons
was meant to be accomplished in a single clock cycle (although I knew there
are various other issues.)
Current CPU architectures permit an SSE scalar or parallel multiply and
add instruction to be issued on
torbenh wrote:
can you please explain, why you reject the idea of -fnoalias ?
msvc has declspec(noalias) icc has -fnoalias
msvc needs it because it doesn't implement restrict and supports
violation of typed aliasing rules as a default. ICL needs it for msvc
compatibility, but has better
Benjamin Redelings I wrote:
Thanks for the information!
Here are several reasons (there are more) why gcc uses 64-bit loads by
default:
1) For a single dot product, the rate of 64-bit data loads roughly
balances the latency of adds to the same register. Parallel dot products
(using 2
Benjamin Redelings I wrote:
Hi,
I have been playing with the GCC vectorizer and examining assembly code
that is produced for dot products that are not for a fixed number of
elements. (This comes up surprisingly often in scientific codes.) So
far, the generated code is not faster than
FX wrote:
Hi all,
I have picked up what seems to be a simple patch from PR36399, but I don't know
enough assembler to tell whether it's fixing it completely or not.
The following function:
#include xmmintrin.h
__m128i r(__m128 d1, __m128 d2, __m128 d3, __m128i r, int t, __m128i s) {return
Toon Moene wrote:
REAL, ALLOCATABLE :: A(:,:), B(:,:), C(:,:), D(:,:), E(:,:), F(:,:)
! ... READ IN EXTEND OF ARRAYS ...
READ*,N
! ... ALLOCATE ARRAYS
ALLOCATE(A(N,N),B(N,N),C(N,N),D(N,N),E(N,N),F(N,N))
! ... READ IN ARRAYS
READ*,A,B
C = A + B
D = A * C
E = B * EXP(D)
F = C * LOG(E)
Toon Moene wrote:
H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Toon Moene t...@moene.org wrote:
L.S.,
Due to the discussion on register allocation, I went back to a hobby of
mine: Studying the assembly output of the compiler.
For this Fortran subroutine (note: unless otherwise told to the
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Tim Prince n...@aol.com wrote:
Toon Moene wrote:
H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Toon Moene t...@moene.org wrote:
L.S.,
Due to the discussion on register allocation, I went back to a hobby of
mine: Studying
Toon Moene wrote:
Toon Moene wrote:
Tim Prince wrote:
If you want those, you must request them with -mtune=barcelona.
OK, so it is an alignment issue (with -mtune=barcelona):
.L6:
movups 0(%rbp,%rax), %xmm0
movups (%rbx,%rax), %xmm1
incl%ecx
addps
Toon Moene wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Toon Moene t...@moene.org wrote:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
At least CPROP, LCM-PRE, and HOIST (i.e. all passes in gcse.c), and
variable tracking.
Are they covered by a --param ? At least that way I could teach
Joern Rennecke wrote:
Quoting Mark Tall mtall@gmail.com:
Joern Rennecke wrote:
But at any rate, the subject does not agree with
the content of the original post. When we talk
about a 'regression' in a particular gcc version,
we generally mean that this version is in some
way worse than a
Eric Niebler wrote:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
I am running into the same problem (cannnot build latest snapshot on
cygwin). I have built and installed the latest binutils from head
(see attached config.log for details). But still the build fails. Any
help?
This is strange!
ecrosbie wrote:
how do I generate random numbers in a f77 program?
Ed Crosbie
ecrosbie wrote:
how do I generate random numbers in a f77 program?
Ed Crosbie
This subject isn't topical on the gcc development forum. If you wish to
use a gnu Fortran random number generator, please consider gfortran,
which implements the language standard random number facility.
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
I want to flag the following failure I have seen on Cygwin 1.5 trying to
build current 4.5-20090625 gcc snapshot:
checking whether the C compiler works... configure: error: in
`/tmp/build/intl':
configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
If you meant to cross
Dave Korn wrote:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
I want to flag the following failure I have seen on Cygwin 1.5 trying to
build current 4.5-20090625 gcc snapshot:
So what's in config.log? And what binutils are you using?
cheers,
DaveK
In my case, it says no permission to
Kai Tietz wrote:
2009/6/26 Seiji Kachi ska...@mqe.biglobe.ne.jp:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Dave Korn ha scritto:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
I want to flag the following failure I have seen on Cygwin 1.5 trying to
build current 4.5-20090625 gcc snapshot:
So
Kai Tietz wrote:
2009/6/26 Tim Prince timothypri...@sbcglobal.net:
Kai Tietz wrote:
2009/6/26 Seiji Kachi ska...@mqe.biglobe.ne.jp:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Dave Korn ha scritto:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
I want to flag the following failure I
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Angelo Graziosi angelo.grazi...@alice.it writes:
The current snapshot 4.5-20090507 fails to bootstrap on Cygwin:
It did bootstrap effortlessly for me, once I logged off to clear hung
processes, with the usual disabling of strict warnings. I'll let
Dave Korn wrote:
Heh, I was just about to post that, only I was looking at $clooginc rather
than $pplinc! The same problem exists for both; I'm pretty sure we should
fall back on $prefix if the --with option is empty.
When I bootstrapped gcc 4.5 on cygwin yesterday, configure
Dave Korn wrote:
Tim Prince wrote:
Dave Korn wrote:
Heh, I was just about to post that, only I was looking at $clooginc rather
than $pplinc! The same problem exists for both; I'm pretty sure we should
fall back on $prefix if the --with option is empty.
When I bootstrapped gcc 4.5
Dave Korn wrote:
Tim Prince wrote:
#include cloog/cloog.h
no such file
-I/include was set by configure. As you say, there is something bogus here.
setup menu shows cloog installed in development category, but I can't find
any such include file. Does this mean the cygwin distribution
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Toon Moene wrote:
Can somebody with access to SPEC sources confirm / deny and file a bug
report, if appropriate?
I just started working on SPEC CPU2006 issues this week.
Seemingly yes. To a certain extend this was by accident as -msse3 was
used, but it is on i586 only
Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
What versions of GMP/MPFR do you get on
your typical development box and how old are your distros?
OpenSuSE 10.3 (originally released Oct. 07):
gmp-devel-4.2.1-58
gmp-devel-32bit-4.2.1-58
mpfr-2.2.1-45
Chris Lattner wrote:
On Mar 23, 2009, at 8:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Chris Lattner wrote:
These companies really don't care about FOSS in the same way GCC
developers do. I'd be highly confident that this would still be a
serious issue for the majority of the companies I've interacted with
Zuxy Meng wrote:
Hi,
Timothy Madden terminato...@gmail.com 写入消息
!
I am sure having twice the number of registers (sse+387) would make a
big difference.
You're not counting the rename registers, you're talking about 32-bit mode
only, and you're discounting the different mode of accessing the
Rodrigo Dominguez wrote:
I am looking at binary auto-vectorization or taking a binary and rewriting
it to use SIMD instructions (either statically or dynamically).
That's a tall order, considering how much source level dependency
information is needed. I don't know whether proprietary binary
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Otherwise, you could consider building GCC yourself, cf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/. (Furthermore, some gfortran developers
offer regular GCC builds, which are linked at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinaries; those are all unofficial
builds, come without any
Philipp Thomas wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 14:24:22 -0500, you wrote:
I have SLES9 and Linux-2.6.5-7.97 kernel install on i586 intel 32 bit
machine. The compiler is gcc-c++3.3.3-43.24. I want to upgrade to
GCC4.3.2. My question are: Would this upgrade work with
SLES9?
This is the
Andrew Tomazos wrote:
I've been studying the x86 compiled form of the following function:
void function()
{
char buffer[X];
}
where X = 0, 1, 2 .. 100
Naively, I would expect to see:
pushl %ebp
movl%esp, %ebp
subl$X, %esp
leave
ret
Brian Dessent wrote:
Cygwin has been a secondary target for a number of years. MinGW has
been a secondary target since 4.3. This generally means that they
should be in fairly good shape, more or less. To quote the docs:
Our release criteria for the secondary platforms is:
* The
Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 6:19 AM, S. Suhasini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We would like to know whether the new version of the software (compiled with
the new GCC) can be deployed and run on the older setup with RHEL AS 3 and
GCC 2.96. We need not compile again on the
Александр Струняшев wrote:
Good afternoon.
I need some help. As from what versions your compiler understand that
long long is 64 bits ?
Best regards, Alexander
P.S. Sorry for my mistakes, I know English bad.
No need to be sorry about English, but the topic is OK for gcc-help, not
gcc
Georg Martius wrote:
Dear gcc developers,
I am new to this list.
I tried to use the auto-vectorization (4.2.1 (SUSE Linux)) but unfortunately
with limited success.
My code is bassically a matrix library in C++. The vectorizer does not like
the member variables. Consider this code
Roberto Bagnara wrote:
#include fenv.h
#include cstdio
int main() {
float x = 2;
float y = 3;
feclearexcept(FE_INEXACT);
x = x / y;
printf(%d %.1000g\n, fetestexcept(FE_INEXACT) != 0, x);
}
Is this a way of testing whether the division is performed at compile
time? Do you
Agner Fog wrote:
Michael Matz wrote:
You must be doing something wrong. If the compiler decides to inline
the string ops it either knows the size or you told it to do it anyway
(-minline-all-stringops or -minline-stringops-dynamically). In both
cases will it use wider than byte moves when
Agner Fog wrote:
I have tested a few of the most important functions in
libc and compared them with other available libraries (MS, Borland,
Intel, Mac). The comparison does not look good for gnu libc. See my test
results in http://www.agner.org/optimize/optimizing_cpp.pdf section 2.6.
As far
Sophia Han wrote:
Hi,
It seems that GCC 4.3.1 does not like the SuSE 10. 2v. It failed when I
install GCC 4.3.1 on my linux machine. Should I upgrade to SuSE 11v in
order to use GCC 4.3.1 or what do you suggest?
Thanks,
Sophia.
Antoniu Pop wrote:
Hi,
I am currently working on
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2008-06-09 16:02:05 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
Use -pedantic to warn about extensions. It doesn't make sense to
warn for extensions if they are not deprecated. After all they are
extensions.
The problem with -pedantic is that it gives lots of spurious
Jerry DeLisle wrote:
Here are gfortran failures I am seeing on Cygwin as of a few hours
ago. I noticed some of these are at -O3, implying some optimization
passes at fault. IIRC nint_2.f90 and default_format_denormal_1.f90 are
not new. The rest of these are fairly recent.
Maybe we need a
FX wrote:
checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error:
C compiler cannot create executables
See `config.log' for more details.
Well, as it says so well, we need to see your config.log if we want to
have any idea at all what's happening. That should be the file in
H.J. Lu wrote:
Is this related to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01951.html
H.J.y t
Seems unlikely. I don't see that Fortran was involved in the failure,
although both of us included it in configure. If it makes a difference,
I'll try to bootstrap C alone tomorrow, from the
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Hello All.
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On Saturday 22 March 2008 11:14, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
* on the positive side, GCC is still doing well and alive
Why Intel and MS compilers are surpassing it?
Honestly, I never coded last years on any Microsoft systems
Joel Sherrill wrote:
Tobias Burnus wrote:
According to the GCC 4.4 Release Criteria,
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/criteria.html, only C and C++ are primary
languages. And thus only C and C++ regressions can be release critical.
I propose to add Fortran to these languages. Reasons:
- Fortran is
Ira Rosen wrote:
Here is the link to the vectorizer's documentation:
http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/tree-ssa/vectorization.html
Thanks, but I take what it says there with some grains of salt. Yes,
-O3 implies -ftree-vectorize on x86_64, but I seem to have to specify
the option on other
Константин wrote:
Hi!
I ask you to put optimimizations tips for programmers into your documentation
site on www. Sure, there are some texts about program optimimization, but you
are the only one, who really understand compilation and execution processes and
know how to make program faster.
I
Qing Wei wrote:
Could someone give some hints of how to describe a FMAC (float mult and
add) insn in machine description, it matches d = b*c+a, which is a four
operands float instrution.
There are plenty of examples in ia64.md and rs6000.md.
Fan Zhang wrote:
how to compile gcc4 on cygwin?
thanks
The generic instructions are here http://gcc.gnu.org/install/
The mailing lists for asking questions are gcc-help
http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
and possibly http://cygwin.com/lists.html
You should be able to find useful hints on the
ashish mahamuni wrote:
Hi,
I am working on Intel i686 machine
I've Hello_World.c file.
When I give following command compiler gives error
that Invalid Option.
gcc -mlittle-endian Hello_World.c
or
gcc -mlittle-endian Hello_World.c
I am using 4.2 version of gcc (Latest one I guess).
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Nov 27, 2007 2:23 PM, Howard Chu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A bit of a minor mystery. Not a problem, just a curiosity. If someone knew
off
the top of their head a reason for it, that'd be cool, but otherwise no
sweat.
I'd try -Os, you might run into ICache
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
