Xavier Periole wrote:
Here a following up of the compilation on the IBM.
I got the following warning:
1500-036: (I) The NOSTRICT option (default at OPT(3)) has the
potential
to alter the semantics of a program. Please refer to documentation on the
STRICT/NOSTRICT option for more information.
Should that be a worry?
Depending on the architecture, different optimizations get added in as
-Ox gets higher. You can selectively add "higher" things, e.g. -qhot,
which is probably a default at -O4. You should start with the compiler
man page to get some idea what this might affect. Look for -qstrict to
see what optimizations might be involved here. For example, there are
some floating-point optimizations, particularly involving reciprocals or
reciprocal square-roots, that only produce approximate results. One
might or might not want to use these, hence the warning. Other
optimizations might enable the compiler to not check for underflows,
division by zero or other such maths-fails. All these kind of things can
mean that the optimized code produces a different result from non-optimized.
Roughly speaking, I'd say it's not a worry for GROMACS.
>
> Note that the warning disappeared with the option -qaltivec added to the
> CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS.
That probably just means that the bit that was causing the warning to be
issued is now being vectorized, e.g. a reciprocal square-root.
Mark
_______________________________________________
gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting!
Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
www interface or send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
