From: Marc Joliet <marcec@gmx.de>
To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Possible Math Problem - Request For Verification
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 01:54:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110626015453.4a67fe37@marcec.huntemann.uni-oldenburg.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110625134111.5c6b08dd.frank.peters@comcast.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2339 bytes --]
Am Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:41:11 -0400
schrieb Frank Peters <frank.peters@comcast.net>:
> Hello,
>
[background information]
Huh, I was unaware that GNU (since they're the authors of GCC/GLIBC) ever had
problems in this area. Since I use my machine for numerical tasks, too, I was
interested in seeing whether I would see the same problem.
> The code will take several minutes to compile, execute, and complete. While
> the test is running it will spit out its progress to stdout. Upon completion
> a brief summary is given:
>
> UCBFAIL indicates problems!
> /tmp/fp-test-results/ccos_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in COS(X) at line 444 for generic
> /tmp/fp-test-results/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in cabsd at line 701 for double
> /tmp/fp-test-results/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in powd at line 701 for double
> /tmp/fp-test-results/clib_DP.output:UCBFAIL clib_DP.output , 25 out of 25 tests completed
> /tmp/fp-test-results/csin_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in SIN(X) at line 444 for generic
>
> only 11 out of 14 show UCBPASS!
I ran the tests without any modifications to ucbREADME/linux.sh and don't get
the cabsd failure:
UCBFAIL indicates problems!
/tmp/fp-test-results/ccos_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in COS(X) at line 444 for generic
/tmp/fp-test-results/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in powd at line 701 for double
/tmp/fp-test-results/clib_DP.output:UCBFAIL clib_DP.output , 25 out of 25 tests completed
/tmp/fp-test-results/csin_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in SIN(X) at line 444 for generic
only 11 out of 14 show UCBPASS!
Out of curiosity, I ran the test two more times and got the same results.
This machine runs on stable, with a slightly older Athlon64 X2.
> There are expected failures in the trigonometric tests since trigonometric
> performance is not specified in IEEE754/854. The failure in powd (double power
> function) is also expected. But everything else should have passed.
Then according to the results above my machine is apparently OK. (I guess I
really should finally read about IEEE floating point more thoroughly, I've been
planning to do that for a while now.)
[...]
> Frank Peters
HTH
--
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-25 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-25 17:41 [gentoo-amd64] Possible Math Problem - Request For Verification Frank Peters
2011-06-25 23:54 ` Marc Joliet [this message]
2011-06-26 0:22 ` Mark Knecht
2011-06-26 1:10 ` Frank Peters
2011-06-26 1:28 ` Frank Peters
2011-06-26 3:44 ` [gentoo-amd64] Possible Math Problem - Request For Verification [Solved] Frank Peters
2011-06-26 3:54 ` Mark Knecht
2011-06-26 4:39 ` Frank Peters
2011-06-26 11:33 ` James Cloos
2011-06-26 12:57 ` Mark Knecht
2011-06-26 16:30 ` Barry Schwartz
2011-06-26 11:30 ` [gentoo-amd64] Possible Math Problem - Request For Verification Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 12:13 ` Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 13:17 ` [gentoo-amd64] unsubscribe Piotr Hosowicz
2011-06-26 15:40 ` Dale
2011-06-26 17:26 ` Lie Ryan
2011-06-26 17:31 ` Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 17:52 ` Dale
2011-06-27 3:22 ` [gentoo-amd64] unsubscribe Duncan
2011-06-26 17:43 ` [gentoo-amd64] unsubscribe Dale
2011-06-26 16:27 ` [gentoo-amd64] Possible Math Problem - Request For Verification Frank Peters
2011-06-26 17:04 ` Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 17:17 ` Mark Knecht
2011-06-26 17:36 ` Frank Peters
2011-06-26 17:45 ` Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 17:54 ` Barry Schwartz
2011-06-26 19:01 ` Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 19:21 ` Barry Schwartz
2011-06-26 19:31 ` Volker Armin Hemmann
2011-06-26 19:49 ` Mark Knecht
2011-06-26 20:33 ` Frank Peters
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110626015453.4a67fe37@marcec.huntemann.uni-oldenburg.de \
--to=marcec@gmx.de \
--cc=gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox