[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 --- Comment #8 from Florian Schanda --- I am no longer working at BMW. For safety topics please contact alexander.schem...@bmw.de or markus.schur...@bmw.de For TRLC and LOBSTER topics please contact philipp.wullstein-kamm...@bmw.de or create issues on public github https://github.com/bmw-software-engineering/trlc/issues
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 Florian Schanda changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #7 from Florian Schanda --- OK, thank you again all for your answers. We have found an alternative approach for verifying that the implementation defined behaviour the 3rd party library depends on is irrelevant in our specific use case. Not great, but it kinda works. Killing the ticket.
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Florian Schanda from comment #5) > Richard, if I may rephrase your statement (for clarity), you're saying: > > > Under your assumptions, -fsignaling-nans should work. There are no known > > bugs > > in this setup, but if you find something please report it. > > Is that accurate? No. See the See Also bugs referenced in this bug.
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 --- Comment #5 from Florian Schanda --- Richard, if I may rephrase your statement (for clarity), you're saying: > Under your assumptions, -fsignaling-nans should work. There are no known bugs > in this setup, but if you find something please report it. Is that accurate? If yes, then this is something we could live with :)
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- The question is what the expectations are. I think that all issues would be considered bugs (see the list of referenced bugs). Can you evaluate it according to your needs and file bugreports for issues not covered?
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 --- Comment #3 from Florian Schanda --- Maybe some additional constraints under which we operate can help: - we never change our rounding mode away from RNE - we never disable support for subnormals in any way - we only ever use float32 and float64, we do not use the intel extended precision format Under those constraints, will -fsignaling-nans work?
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 --- Comment #2 from Florian Schanda --- Hi Andrew, thank you so much for your reply. The architecture in question is Goldmont, is the flag alright for that target? > A third party library depending on signaling NaNs is slightly an > issue in general considering -fsignaling-nans is not on by default > and some (many?) targets fpu have issues with signaling NaNs in general ... Tell me about it :)
[Bug middle-end/107436] Is -fsignaling-nans still experimental?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107436 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=57994, ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=67052, ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=77926, ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=88640, ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=97965, ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=52258, ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=46993 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- There seems like there are still known issues with signalling nans on different targets still. There has been many fixes in recent years but not all might be there. Also it depends on the target you are targetting. A third party library depending on signaling NaNs is slightly an issue in general considering -fsignaling-nans is not on by default and some (many?) targets fpu have issues with signaling NaNs in general ...
