This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: reference implementation of BLAS

From: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
To: Warren Turkal <wt at atmos dot colostate dot edu>
Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 07:25:34 -0700
Subject: Re: reference implementation of BLAS
References: <200609211111.49548.wt@atmos.colostate.edu> <20060925002932.GB49550@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <200609251109.44032.wt@atmos.colostate.edu> <200609300202.36748.wt@atmos.colostate.edu>

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 02:02:36AM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
> On Monday 25 September 2006 11:09, Warren Turkal wrote:
> > To my knowledge, I am not using -ffast-math. In fact, I shouldn't be using
> > any optimization options on the compile. I just looked at the ouput.txt I
> > published, and it doesn't have the strings "fast" and "-O" in it anywhere.
> 
> This thread seems to have just ended. Does anyone have any ideas for getting 
> the CBLAS test to pass? I mean, it seems that gcc 4.1 is losing precision. I 
> just don't have any idea how to start troubleshooting this problem.
> 

I don't see a problem when I build blas/lapack.  I also
haven't seen your log file because you specified a url
that I can't access.

-- 
Steve

References:
- reference implementation of BLAS
  - From: Warren Turkal
- Re: reference implementation of BLAS
  - From: Steve Kargl
- Re: reference implementation of BLAS
  - From: Warren Turkal
- Re: reference implementation of BLAS
  - From: Warren Turkal

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]