Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> -Original Message- > From: fpc-devel On Behalf > Of Florian Klaempfl > Sent: Monday, 30 April 2018 04:28 > > That ended up making things worse in some cases. > > Can you take a look at the generated machine code if delphi uses > proper multi

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Am 28.04.2018 um 17:57 schrieb Thorsten Engler: >> -Original Message- >> From: fpc-devel On Behalf >> Of Florian Klämpfl >> So something like >> >> cmp edx, $4330 >> jge @@zero >> cmp edx, $3FE0 >> .align 16 >>

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> From: fpc-devel On Behalf Of J. > Gareth Moreton > Sent: Sunday, 29 April 2018 12:36 > As an extra point, removing the 'skip' check (i.e. cmp ax, $3FE0, jbe @@skip) > removes 6 bytes from the code size and shaves about 2 to 3 nanoseconds off > the

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> -Original Message- > From: fpc-devel On Behalf > Of Florian Klämpfl > So something like > > cmp edx, $4330 > jge @@zero > cmp edx, $3FE0 > .align 16 > jbe @@skip > > might be much better. That ended up

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On 04/28/2018 09:33 AM, Thorsten Engler wrote: I've attached the source (I'm using Delphi 10.2.3, 64bit to compile it) in case anyone wants to try it out on different cpus and with different alignments (change the {$CODEALIGN 1} and add nops to the XXX1 .. XXX8 procedures to finetune alignment).

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Am 28.04.2018 um 15:33 schrieb Thorsten Engler: > procedure XXX1; > asm > .noframe > nop > nop // added this > end; I did not look at the code in detail but I suspect this is caused by the two branches: cmp edx, $4330 jge @@zero cmp edx, $3FE0 jbe

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

vel-boun...@lists.freepascal.org> On Behalf Of Sven Barth via fpc-devel Sent: Friday, 27 April 2018 23:47 To: FPC developers' list <fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> Cc: Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com> Subject: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

-devel <fpc-devel-boun...@lists.freepascal.org> On Behalf > Of Mattias Gaertner > Sent: Saturday, 28 April 2018 03:39 > To: fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org > Subject: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac > function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64 > > O

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

; Subject: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64 Thorsten Engler <thorsten.eng...@gmx.net <mailto:thorsten.eng...@gmx.net> > schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 18:48: For what it’s worth, Delphi simply decided to give up on doing i

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Thorsten Engler schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 17:47: > > That's true for i386. But on x86_64 cvt(t)sd2si instuctions can > > deal with int64 range, if destination register is a 64-bit one. > > You are still going to be at least 960-bit short... > I've disabled the SSE

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> That's true for i386. But on x86_64 cvt(t)sd2si instuctions can > deal with int64 range, if destination register is a 64-bit one. You are still going to be at least 960-bit short... ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 00:09:12 +1000 "Thorsten Engler" wrote: > Highest integer that fits in a Int64: > 9223372036854775808 > 1e20: > 1 > > Your Int is overflowing. > > You can’t implement Frac by going through an Integer, that will never work. It

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

27.04.2018 17:14, Sven Barth via fpc-devel wrote: Thorsten Engler > schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 16:09: Highest integer that fits in a Int64: 9223372036854775808 1e20: 1 __ __

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Thorsten Engler schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 16:09: > Highest integer that fits in a Int64: > > 9223372036854775808 > > 1e20: > > 1 > > > > Your Int is overflowing. > > > > You can’t implement Frac by going through an Integer, that will never >

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

, or thereabouts). From: fpc-devel <fpc-devel-boun...@lists.freepascal.org> On Behalf Of Sven Barth via fpc-devel Sent: Friday, 27 April 2018 23:47 To: FPC developers' list <fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> Cc: Sven Barth <pascaldra...@googlemail.com> Subject: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: