Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/07/26/15:56:33
--------------020103020602040508070400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Leena DOT Padgaonkar AT patni DOT com wrote:
> My basic problem is that the cygwin floating addition is giving
different results than VS 2008 for certain float values .Both the
environments are on the same PC. So I was wondering about the floating
point format used in cygwin.
>
> Btw, the makefile which I am using are having following options
OPTFLAGS = -I . -O3 -funroll-loops -mtune=pentium3 -ffast-math
-mfancy-math-387
>
>
Only 64-bit Windows passes the same settings of x87 precision mode
(53-bit) and SSE abrupt underflow mode to both gcc and MSVC built .exe.
-ffast-math would not be recommended for similarity to MSVC build, where
none of the aggressive options would normally be in use. Only the
abrupt underflow setting matches MSVC.
If /Ox is set for MSVC, similar optimization should be obtained with gcc
-O3.
If you are looking for full performance, and don't need compatibility
with 10-year-old CPUs, you would normally set /fp:fast /arch:SSE2 in
MSVC, and corresponding -march=pentium-m -mfpmath=sse (or newer -march)
in gcc. If you don't set /arch:SSE2 /fp:fast in MSVC, you imply K&R
style promotion of certain float expressions to double, such as you get
with 387 math in gcc.
--------------020103020602040508070400
Content-Type: message/rfc822;
name="[Fwd: Re: cygwin gcc compatibility with MSVC numerics].eml"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename*0="[Fwd: Re: cygwin gcc compatibility with MSVC numerics].eml"
Return-Path: <cygwin-return-153162-tprince=computer DOT org AT cygwin DOT com>
Received: from rly-mg05.mx.aol.com (rly-mg05.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.111]) by air-mg07.mail.aol.com (v124.15) with ESMTP id MAILINMG071-a114a6cb397d2; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:59 -0400
Received: from cs-ems2.ieee.org (cs-ems2.ieee.org [140.98.193.208]) by rly-mg05.mx.aol.com (v124.15) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMG053-a114a6cb397d2; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:47 -0400
Received: from gemini4.ieee.org (gemini4.ieee.org [140.98.193.189])
by cs-ems2.ieee.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n6QJokf6013026
for <tprince AT computer DOT org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:46 -0400
Received: from gemini4.ieee.org (gemini4.ieee.org [127.0.0.1])
by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43EC69C820
for <tprince AT computer DOT org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:43:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hormel7.ieee.org (hormel7.ieee.org [140.98.193.230])
by gemini4.ieee.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0CB569C81D
for <tprince AT computer DOT org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:43:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sourceware.org (sourceware.org [209.132.176.174])
by hormel7.ieee.org (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with SMTP id n6QJojvq006655
for <tprince AT computer DOT org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:46 -0400
Received: (qmail 23817 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2009 19:50:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 23808 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jul 2009 19:50:34 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from imo-m12.mx.aol.com (HELO imo-m12.mail.aol.com) (64.12.143.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:50:28 +0000
Received: from imo-da02.mx.aol.com (imo-da02.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.200]) by imo-m12.mail.aol.com (v107.10) with ESMTP id RELAYIN1-24a6cb370b6; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:08 -0400
Received: from N8TM AT aol DOT com by imo-da02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v40_r1.5.) id s.c33.59bb3904 (37581); Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (99-13-231-72.lightspeed.snjsca.sbcglobal.net [99.13.231.72]) by cia-mb05.mx.aol.com (v124.15) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMB056-92cd4a6cb3752bb; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:50:16 -0400
Message-ID: <4A6CB376 DOT 1030605 AT aol DOT com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:50:14 -0700
From: Tim Prince <n8tm AT aol DOT com>
Reply-To: tprince AT computer DOT org
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, gcc-help AT gcc DOT org, Leena DOT Padgaonkar AT patni DOT com
Subject: [Fwd: Re: cygwin gcc compatibility with MSVC numerics]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------060503020200030408000508"
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-tprince=computer DOT org AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Spam-Score: undef - cygwin.com is whitelisted.
X-CanIt-Geo: ip=209.132.176.174; country=US; region=NC; city=Raleigh; postalcode=27606; latitude=35.7463; longitude=-78.7239; metrocode=560; areacode=919; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=35.7463,-78.7239&z=6
X-IEEE-UCE-Settings: tprince AT computer_society (inherits from 32_HI_TAG-LO_BLOCK,default)
X-IEEE-UCE-Stats-ID: Bayes signature not available
X-Scanned-By: IEEE UCE Filtering Service (UCE . ieee . org) on 140.98.193.230
X-AOL-IP: 140.98.193.208
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
--------------060503020200030408000508
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Leena DOT Padgaonkar AT patni DOT com wrote:
> My basic problem is that the cygwin floating addition is giving
> different results than VS 2008 for certain float values .Both the
> environments are on the same PC. So I was wondering about the floating
> point format used in cygwin.
>
> Btw, the makefile which I am using are having following options
> OPTFLAGS = -I . -O3 -funroll-loops -mtune=pentium3 -ffast-math
> -mfancy-math-387
>
>
Only 64-bit Windows passes the same settings of x87 precision mode
(53-bit) and SSE abrupt underflow mode to both gcc and MSVC built .exe.
-ffast-math would not be recommended for similarity to MSVC build, where
none of the aggressive options would normally be in use. Only the
abrupt underflow setting matches MSVC.
If /Ox is set for MSVC, similar optimization should be obtained with gcc
-O3.
If you are looking for full performance, and don't need compatibility
with 10-year-old CPUs, you would normally set /fp:fast /arch:SSE2 in
MSVC, and corresponding -march=pentium-m -mfpmath=sse (or newer -march)
in gcc. If you don't set /arch:SSE2 /fp:fast in MSVC, you imply K&R
style promotion of certain float expressions to double, such as you get
with 387 math in gcc.
--------------060503020200030408000508
Content-Type: message/rfc822;
name="Re: cygwin gcc compatibility with MSVC numerics.eml"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="Re: cygwin gcc compatibility with MSVC numerics.eml"
Return-Path: <n8tm AT aol DOT com>
Received: from [192.168.1.102] (99-13-231-72.lightspeed.snjsca.sbcglobal.net [99.13.231.72]) by cia-ma05.mx.aol.com (v124.15) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMA058-91464a6cabea119; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:18:05 -0400
Message-ID: <4A6CABEB DOT 4000701 AT aol DOT com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:18:03 -0700
From: Tim Prince <n8tm AT aol DOT com>
Reply-To: tprince AT computer DOT org
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Leena DOT Padgaonkar AT patni DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin gcc compatibility with MSVC numerics
References: <10746230 DOT 2742571248621615816 DOT JavaMail DOT nabble AT isper DOT nabble DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <10746230 DOT 2742571248621615816 DOT JavaMail DOT nabble AT isper DOT nabble DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AOL-IP: 99.13.231.72
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
Leena DOT Padgaonkar AT patni DOT com wrote:
> My basic problem is that the cygwin floating addition is giving different results than VS 2008 for certain float values .Both the environments are on the same PC. So I was wondering about the floating point format used in cygwin.
>
> Btw, the makefile which I am using are having following options
> OPTFLAGS = -I . -O3 -funroll-loops -mtune=pentium3 -ffast-math -mfancy-math-387
>
>
Only 64-bit Windows passes the same settings of x87 precision mode
(53-bit) and SSE abrupt underflow mode to both gcc and MSVC built .exe.
-ffast-math would not be recommended for similarity to MSVC build, where
none of the aggressive options would normally be in use. Only the
abrupt underflow setting matches MSVC.
If /Ox is set for MSVC, similar optimization should be obtained with gcc
-O3.
If you are looking for full performance, and don't need compatibility
with 10-year-old CPUs, you would normally set /fp:fast /arch:SSE2 in
MSVC, and corresponding -march=pentium-m -mfpmath=sse (or newer -march)
in gcc. If you don't set /arch:SSE2 /fp:fast in MSVC, you imply K&R
style promotion of certain float expressions to double, such as you get
with 387 math in gcc.
--------------060503020200030408000508
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
--------------060503020200030408000508--
--------------020103020602040508070400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
--------------020103020602040508070400--
- Raw text -