Displaying 20 results from an estimated 11000 matches similar to: "[test-suite] making the test-suite succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on""
2016 Oct 08
3
[test-suite] making the test-suite succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
> On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:56 PM, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com <mailto:sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>>
>> To: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org <mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org>>
>> Cc: "Kristof
2016 Oct 14
3
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
>> To: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>,
2016 Oct 08
2
[test-suite] making the test-suite succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hal Finkel via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>, "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Matthias Braun"
> <matze at braunis.de>, "Clang Dev" <cfe-dev
2016 Oct 14
2
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On 14 October 2016 at 15:50, Sebastian Pop <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
> These 3 tests are passing with the following configurations:
> -O3 -ffp-contract=off
> -O3 -ffp-contract=on
> -O0 -ffp-contract=off
> -O0 -ffp-contract=on
>
> They are not passing at:
> -Ofast -ffp-contract=on
> -Ofast -ffp-contract=off
Let's separate completely FP-contract and
2016 Oct 12
3
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
>> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
>> Cc: "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>, "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Matthias
2016 Oct 12
4
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Sebastian Pop <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
>>> To: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>
>>> Cc: "Hal
2016 Oct 12
8
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On 12 October 2016 at 14:26, Sebastian Pop <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
> Correct me if I misunderstood: you would be ok changing the
> reference output to exactly match the output of "-O0 -ffp-contract=off".
No, that's not at all what I said.
Matching identical outputs to FP tests makes no sense because there's
*always* an error bar.
The output of O0, O1, O2,
2016 Oct 12
4
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> I don't think that Clang/LLVM uses it by default on x86_64. If you're using -Ofast, however, that would explain it. I recommend looking at -O3 vs -O0 and make sure those are the same. -Ofast enables -ffast-math, which can legitimately cause differences.
>
The following tests pass at "-O3" and
2016 Oct 10
2
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
Hi,
I would need some help to fix polybench/symm:
void kernel_symm(int ni, int nj,
DATA_TYPE alpha,
DATA_TYPE beta,
DATA_TYPE POLYBENCH_2D(C,NI,NJ,ni,nj),
DATA_TYPE POLYBENCH_2D(A,NJ,NJ,nj,nj),
DATA_TYPE POLYBENCH_2D(B,NI,NJ,ni,nj))
{
int i, j, k;
DATA_TYPE acc;
/* C := alpha*A*B + beta*C, A is symetric */
for (i = 0; i < _PB_NI; i++)
for (j = 0; j < _PB_NJ; j++)
{
2016 Oct 12
2
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On 12 October 2016 at 05:35, Sebastian Pop <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
> polybench/linear-algebra/solvers/gramschmidt/ exposes the same problems as symm.
> It does not match the reference output at -O0 -ffp-contract=off,
> and it only passes all elements comparisons for FP_ABSTOLERANCE=1 for
> "-Ofast" vs. "-O0 -ffp-contract=off".
I think we're
2016 Oct 12
2
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On 12 October 2016 at 13:04, Sebastian Pop <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
> The other problem is the reference output does not match
> at "-O0 -ffp-contract=off". It might be that the reference output was recorded
> at "-O3 -ffp-contract=off". I think that this hides either a compiler
> bug or a test bug.
Ah, yes! You mentioned before and I forgot to
2016 Oct 12
3
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On 12 October 2016 at 15:05, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> This is something we need to understand. No, there's not always an error bar. With FMA formation and without non-IEEE-compliant optimizations (i.e. fast-math), the optimized answer should be identical to the non-optimized answer.
What about architectures that this is never respected, like Darwin?
In the general
2016 Oct 20
2
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>> polybench/linear-algebra/kernels/symm, FP_ABSTOLERANCE=1e1
>> polybench/linear-algebra/solvers/gramschmidt, FP_ABSTOLERANCE=1e0
>> What should be a good relative tolerance to set for these two tests?
>
> What's the minimum relative tolerance that you need for them to pass?
Setting
2016 Oct 12
3
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> To: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>, "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>,
> "Matthias Braun" <matze at
2016 Oct 11
3
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>
>> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
>> Cc: "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>, "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Matthias
2016 Sep 29
3
[cfe-dev] a proposed script to help with test-suite programs that output _lots_ of FP numbers
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sebastian Pop" <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com>
> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>, "Abe Skolnik"
> <a.skolnik at samsung.com>, "cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at
2016 Oct 20
2
[test-suite] making polybench/symm succeed with "-Ofast" and "-ffp-contract=on"
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 20 October 2016 at 16:05, Sebastian Pop <sebpop.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Setting FP_ABSTOLERANCE=1e-5, the two tests are passing
>> when compiled with -Ofast for the following relative tolerance:
>>
>> polybench/linear-algebra/kernels/symm, FP_TOLERANCE=1e-10
>>
2016 Sep 29
2
[cfe-dev] improving test-suite`s FP subtests to be able to compare both exact-match outputs and more-optimized builds that may have different outputs due to FP optimizations
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthias Braun via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Abe Skolnik" <a.skolnik at samsung.com>
> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 6:20:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] improving
2016 Sep 29
5
[cfe-dev] a proposed script to help with test-suite programs that output _lots_ of FP numbers
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sebastian Pop via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Sebastian Paul Pop" <s.pop at samsung.com>, "Abe Skolnik"
> <a.skolnik at samsung.com>, "cfe-dev"
2016 Sep 29
2
[cfe-dev] improving test-suite`s FP subtests to be able to compare both exact-match outputs and more-optimized builds that may have different outputs due to FP optimizations
Dear all,
I would like some help, please, with implementing Hal`s excellent suggestion, which I have
reworded as below. Hal has confirmed a previous version of my rewording as a correct
interpretation. [I made minor changes since then, e.g. for grammar.]
[Abe wrote:]
>> I think you [Hal] are suggesting something like this:
>> 1) compile the program with FP fusion off,