GCC 4.0, Fast Math, and Acovea

[Scott Robert Ladd]

Uros Bizjak wrote:

> Hello Scott!
>
>> Specifically, the -funsafe-math-optimizations flag doesn't work 
>> correctly on AMD64 because the default on that platform is 
>> -mfpmath=sse. Without specifying -mfpmath=387, 
>> -funsafe-math-optimizations does not generate inline processor 
>> instructions for most floating-point functions.
>>
>> Let's put it another way: Manually selecting -mfpmath=387 cuts 
>> run-times by 50% for programs dependent on functions like sin() and 
>> sqrt(), as compared to -funsafe-math-optimizations by itself.
>
>
>
> It was found that moving data from SSE registers to X87 registers (and 
> back) only to call an x87 builtin degrades performance. Because of 
> this, x87 builtins are disabled for -mfpmath=sse and a normal libcall 
> is issued for sin(), etc functions. If someone wants to use x87 
> builtins, then _all_ math operations should be done in x87 registers 
> to avoid costly SSE->x87 moves.
>
> BTW: Does adding -D__NO_MATH_INLINES improve performance for 
> -mfpmath=sse? That would be PR19602.
>
> Uros.
>
>
>
Well, on every function-intensive (i.e., using lots of sqrt(), sin(), 
and such) program I've tried, using -funsafe-math-optimizations provides 
not significant benefit on the Opteron *unless* it is combined with 
-mfpmath=387.

I note that Intel and other compilers do not seem to have this problem.

Now, I'm more than happy to live with the situation, since it has a 
simple work-around -- but I think it at least needs to be made clear in 
the GCC documentation that this situation exists. Otherwise, GCC 4.0 
looks *terribly* for many mathematical tasks on AMD64. And right now, 
AMD64 is a hot property in the mathematical circles, especially in 
clustered supercomputing.

..Scott