Hi,
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 08:38:55AM +0000, Saraswati, Sujoy (OSTL) wrote:
> > PR tree-optimization/61441
> > * gcc.dg/pr61441.c: New testcase.
>
> Note the testcase fails on i686-linux, and even -fexcess-precision=standard
> doesn't help (-ffloat-store works, but that is a big hammer and we really
> don't want it for targets without excess precision).
> At least with -fexcess-precision=standard, the problem is in the fabs case,
> with -fexcess-precision=standard the value is then rounded from long
> double to double and that rounding affects the signalling bit.
> So, either the testcase should be compiled with -fexcess-precision=standard
> and the operation(Abs) case be guarded with #if __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__
> == 0, or something similar.
I modified the test case as below -
Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/pr61441.c
===================================================================
--- testsuite/gcc.dg/pr61441.c (revision 232121)
+++ testsuite/gcc.dg/pr61441.c (working copy)
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/* { dg-do run } */
-/* { dg-options "-O1 -lm" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O1 -lm -fexcess-precision=standard" } */
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <stdio.h>
@@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ int main (void)
operation(Add);
operation(Mult);
operation(Div);
+#if __FLT_EVAL_METHOD__ == 0
operation(Abs);
+#endif
return 0;
}
However, I do not have access to a i686-linux box to test it out. Let me know
if this looks fine.
I did a search on the https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-12/ but
couldn't see a failure report for this - is there place where I could look up
to see the test results for various architectures ?
There was another issue reported on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61441, where the test fails on
arm-none-eabi with unresolved symbol for issignaling(). Apparently, the
newlib's math.h doesn't have the issignaling macro - let me know if I need to
modify the test case to take care of this.
Regards,
Sujoy
