[Bug 1030250] gsl fails on a test with GCC 7 on i586

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250#c4 Adam Majer changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|IN_PROGRESS |CONFIRMED CC| |matz@suse.com, | |rguenther@suse.com --- Comment #4 from Adam Majer --- This failure is GCC related for this version of gsl. gcc6-6.3.1+r245113-1.5 from Tumbleweed yields success. gcc7-7.1.1+r247574-21.2 from Staging test error. The tests fail not by a tiny margin either,

[ 209s] ====================================== [ 209s] gsl 2.3: specfunc/test-suite.log [ 209s] ====================================== [ 209s] [ 209s] # TOTAL: 1 [ 209s] # PASS: 0 [ 209s] # SKIP: 0 [ 209s] # XFAIL: 0 [ 209s] # FAIL: 1 [ 209s] # XPASS: 0 [ 209s] # ERROR: 0 [ 209s] [ 209s] .. contents:: :depth: 2 [ 209s] [ 209s] FAIL: test [ 209s] ========== [ 209s] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [9186711] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [9187385] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [15218755] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [15219429] [ 209s] FAIL test (exit status: 1) [ 209s] [ 209s] ./specfunc/test.log [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [9186711] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [9187385] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [15218755] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [15219429] [ 209s] FAIL test (exit status: 1)

The expected deviance is <1e-10 for relative error and this is closer to 1e-4 Since GSL didn't change its code, there must be some change in GCC floating point optimization? Also, disabling optimization causes tests to fail in some other case :/ Michael, Richard, do you have any clues as to what changed in GCC that could result in this? There are no problems with any tests on x86_64. Disabling optimization causes failures in other tests due to error accumulation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.