This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2
- From: "tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 27 Sep 2004 19:56:52 -0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/5900] [g77 & gfortran] Lapack regressions since g77 2.95.2
- References: <20020309112600.5900.schmid@snake.iap.physik.tu-darmstadt.de>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-27 19:56 -------
>From a follow-up mail to the one I referenced before, numbers with -ffast-math
only, no optimization
CST drivers: 1 out of 11664 tests failed to pass the threshold
CST drivers: 2 out of 11664 tests failed to pass the threshold
CBD: 1 out of 4085 tests failed to pass the threshold
CLS drivers: 4050 out of 65268 tests failed to pass the threshold
DES: 2 out of 3264 tests failed to pass the threshold
DSX: 2 out of 3494 tests failed to pass the threshold
DXV drivers: 200 out of 5000 tests failed to pass the threshold
SXV drivers: 37 out of 5000 tests failed to pass the threshold
SST drivers: 1 out of 14256 tests failed to pass the threshold
ZXV drivers: 24 out of 5000 tests failed to pass the threshold
The only change is that CLS got even worse. Actually, I find it surprsing that
there are changes, I would have assumed that -ffast-math only comes into play
when optimizing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900