Runtime hang for explicit conversion from double to signed integer.

Runtime hang for explicit conversion from double to signed integer.

I am using Intel C++ Windows
Compiler (Professional Edition) v11 and facing following issue. Is there anybody else whose seen the same problem? If yes, please throw in your thoughts or comments/assistance/possible workarounds.

I cannot do explicit conversion of double values
to signed integer since it causes runtime hang of the process for certain intel
processors. However, the same works for unsigned int
conversion (see below test.cpp):

double doubleVal = 1;
unsigned int uintVal = (unsigned int)doubleVal; //Works Fine
int intVal = (int)doubleVal; //System hangs runtime.


  • Using the
    compiler in conjunction with Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 (VC9). Operating
    System used in Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit.
  • Compiled with
    following flags: icl.exe -Qvc9 -Qms0 -QxK -nologo -Od -Gy -GF -EHa
    -fp:precise -Zc:wchar_t -Zc:forScope -W3 -G7 test .cpp

Problem occurs in following machines
(where we have observed):

  • Fujitsu Siemens
    Celsius R650 Intel Processor Xeon CPU E5440
  • Dell Vostro 420
    Intel Core 2 Duo

Program output (problem scenario):

attempting double to uint conversion

must be 1: 1

attempting double to int conversion

Now the program hangs
indefinitely instead of displaying intVal must be 1: 1 and

Problem does NOT occur in following

  • Fujitsu Siemens
    Celsius R670 Intel Processor Xeon CPU X5570
  • Dell Vostro 430
    Intel Core i5 processor.
  • HP Z800 Intel
    Processor Xeon CPU X5650

Program output (working scenario):

attempting double to uint conversion

must be 1: 1

attempting double to int conversion

must be 1: 1

18 posts / 0 new
Last post
For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.

> "Is there anybody else whose seen the same problem?"

That is very unlikely, and probably not relevant. If the error occurs only on a specific machine, with a specific OS, compiler and set of compiler options, the less likely it is that someone else has stumbled on the same problem.

You did not post the code for test.cpp. I do not see how anyone can comment on a bug that has not been seen.

This program works fine with w_cproc_p_11.1.070, using your command line. I wondered why you are using compiler options relevant to obsolete 32-bit CPUs on a modern 64-bit CPU and a 64-bit OS (/QxK, /G7).


using namespace std;
double doubleVal = 1;
unsigned int uintVal = (unsigned int)doubleVal; 
int intVal = (int)doubleVal;
printf("D : %.3e   U : %u   I : %dn",doubleVal,uintVal,intVal);

In fact, the option /QxK has deteriorated steadily in reliability since its peak usefulness with icc 8.1, and is to be avoided in currently maintained icc versions. Like it or not, it's not possible to perform full QA on P-III or Athlon-32, so it's not feasible to maintain an option specific to those platforms, even though it should have worked on current platforms if it were maintained. The /G7 option is probably innocuous, although I agree with the criticism about gratuitous use of obsolete options. If I remember correctly a decade back, the combination /QxK /G7 was intended to improve support of P-III compatible code on P4, before the problems of generating good basic P-III code were solved.
In case it's of any interest to you, the cast from double => signed int should be accomplished in line with 2 swaps of x87 rounding mode (no way could /G7 avoid the performance problem), while double => unsigned int should generate a library function call, thus disabling many optimizations. As the 11.1 compiler has no library versions corresponding to /QxK, the library call has to be the same as /QxIA32, so would have been tested in that mode. The effect in the presence of bugs would be entirely different, regardless of whether the bug is largely your responsibility (like using an unsupported option) or the compiler's (like not warning you vociferously enough about that option).


bharathdude's sample program should not hang regardless of use of old/depreciated option switches. The compiler is (evidently) generating a bad code path decision: i.e. query system as to what instructions are available then taking one of multiple paths. One of the paths is bunged up.

The sample program looks small, bharathdude could add the option to produce an assembler listing file, then attach the file. The bad code path should easily be discovered with a visual walk through the listing.

Jim Dempsey


I might add...

The compiler should be able to detect ill advised option combinations, report with warning, then produce code that works on the least capable system (most compatible). IOW under this circumstance produce code that works at the sacrifice of performance.


Jim Dempsey

To Jim's comments I wish to add that any compiler that accepts options that have no effect ought to warn about their being ignored, by default. It is not appropriate for the documentation to describe the effects of an option when these effects are not implemented in the compiler.

And to add, make sure it is a warning and not an error. As some users will invariably be using make files (or documentation) from other compiler vendors. The warning should be sufficient.

Best Reply

As far as I can remember, the 11.1 compiler documentation didn't mention the options /QxK /G7. An attempt was made to get rid of them for 10.0, but then they were kept in a possibly incomplete form.
The best which could be hoped for the no longer documented /QxK, after the separate SSE and SSE2 library support was eliminated, was that it should always work the same as /arch:IA32, but I didn't see any promise made of that.
I did agree already that the compiler didn't make enough effort to warn against obsolete options.
If the supported /arch:IA32 gave trouble back when 11.1 was the current compiler, a test case demonstrating it should have been submitted on

I don't know myself whether both of the quoted platforms are old enough to make it likely that the quoted options were never tested on the platform. The quoted option string seems rather complicated, enough that the exact combination might never have been tested significantly. It does even happen that the same Dell platform model is used for more than one CPU over time, such as an original Core2 not supporting SSE4 and a later one which does support SSE4. When working within supported options, and using up to date compilers, of course it's entirely reasonable to expect any issues which come up with an updated CPU model to be fixed.

I'm willing to assume, although 11.0 compiler is mentioned, that it was 11.1, since Windows 7 support didn't come until the middle of the 11.1 run (long after /QxK or /G7 would have been tested during development). It would have been relatively difficult to run 11.0 on Win7.

Tim, thank you so much for your Windows 7 observation which triggered my memory on this. I'm pretty sure the original poster has probably run into the issue described at . My advice would be to get the latest 11.1 update.

I discovered below:

icl.exe -Qvc9
-Qms0 -QxK -nologo -Od -Gy -GF -EHa -fp:precise -Zc:wchar_t -Zc:forScope -W3 -G7 test.cpp

icl.exe -Qvc9
-Qms0 QxSSE2 -nologo -Od -Gy -GF -EHa -fp:precise -Zc:wchar_t -Zc:forScope -W3
-G7 test.cpp

As per ( Qxk which is now QxSSE shall not work for processors earlier to those that use a specific version of SSE. From where i see, it is definitely a bug in intel that QxSSE works for Intel Core i5 but does not work on Intel Core2 Duo because Core2 Duo is older than Core i5. Anyway, From above article:-

2. Processor-specific options of the form /Qx on Windows*( -x
on Linux* or Mac OS* X) generate specialized code for processors
specified by . The resulting executables from these
processor-specific options can only be run on the specified or later
Intel processors, as they incorporate optimizations specific to those
processors and use a specific version of the Streaming SIMD Extensions
(SSE) instruction set and/or the Intel Advanced Vector Extensions
(AVX) instruction set. This switch enables some optimizations not
enabled with the corresponding switches /arch:x or -m.
A run-time check is inserted in the resulting executable that will halt
the application if run on an incompatible processor. This is intended
to help you quickly find out that the program was not intended for the
processor it is running on and potentially avoids an illegal
instruction error. For this check to be effective, the source file
containing the main program or the dynamic library main function should
be compiled with this option enabled.

    Where the value for can be:

    May generate Intel AVX, SSE4.2, SSE4.1, SSSE3, SSE3, SSE2 and SSE instructions for Intel processors. Optimizes for 2nd generation Intel Core processors.

    May generate Intel SSE4.2, SSE4.1, SSSE3, SSE3, SSE2 and SSE
    instructions for Intel processors. Optimizes for the Intel Core i7,
    i5 and i3processor families and the Intel Xeon 55XX,56XX and 75XX

    May generate Intel SSE4.1, SSSE3, SSE3, SSE2 and SSE instructions for Intel processors. Optimizes for the 45nm Hi-k next generation Intel Core microarchitecture.

    May generate Intel SSSE3, SSE3, SSE2 and SSE
    instructions for Intel processors. Optimizes for Intel Core
    microarchitecture. -xssse3 is the default for the Intel 64 compiler on
    Mac OS* X.

    May generate Intel SSSE3, SSE3,
    SSE2 and SSE instructions for Intel processors. Optimizes for the
    Intel Atom processor family and Intel Centrino Atom Processor

    May generate Intel SSE3, SSE2 and SSE
    instructions. Optimizes for the enhanced Pentium M processor
    microarchitecture and Intel Netburst microarchitecture. -xsse3 is the
    default for the IA-32 compiler on Mac OS* X.

    May generate Intel SSE2 and SSE instructions. Optimizes for the Intel Netburst microarchitecture.

So, instead of Qxk, which above option should i use if my code has to work for all below processors:

  • Intel Processor Xeon CPU E5440 and later
  • Intel Processor Xeon CPU X5570 and later
  • Intel Core 2 Duo and later.

Should i assume that its quite safe to use QxAVX so that my program will work on all existing processors and future ones too?

Thanks for the suggestion but this is not the issue i am facing. Its more to do with SSE compiler option than to do with a segmentation fault during runtime.

Hi Tim, Yes its 11.1:-

Intel C++ Compiler Professional for applications running on IA-32, Version 11.1 Build 20090511

I found a discrepancy in the 11.1 documentation. In one place, it recommends -QxIA32 in place of -QxK, in another it recommends the unsupported replacement -QxSSE. According to my understanding, /arch:IA32 should be used to support CPUs which don't support SSE2, not that there's any reason it should be different from /QxIA32.
If you don't use float data types, there wouldn't have been any advantage in /QxK even on the old compiler versions which implemented it.

I would recommend -QxSSE3 or -QxSSE2as you might run your execuitable on other platforms (e.g. notebook).


use the option to add processor (runtime selected)optimized code path -Qax{max arch}

-QaxAVX or -QaxSSE4.2

Note difference between "x" and "ax" on -Q...
The execuitable size will be larger on -Qax... systems and will(may)run slightly slower on targeted system.

Jim Dempsey

I believe -QaxAVX or -QaxSSE4.2 with 11.1 compiler require SSE2 minimum, even though there are paths for both the old and new CPU types.
A combination like -QaxSSE3 -arch:ia32 will support both pre-SSE2 CPUs and take advantage of SSE3, with a larger executable size, as Jim said.

The istruction set is upward comatible. You may use /QxSSSE3. you can not use /QxAVX.

Om is correct in that /QxSSSE3 will work for all of the CPUs listed at the top of this thread, although it may not be the best choice, while /QxAVX would work on none of them (unless your I3 is the latest one). /QxSSE3 will work for CPUs back as far as Nocona (the first Intel64 CPU), and may work better than SSSE3 on the newer ones. If you do wish to support CPUs as old as P-III and Athlon-32, as the choice of /QxK implies, a dual path option such as /QaxSSE4.1 /arch:IA32 (which would take the optimized path on a recent Core 2) may be useful. You might also consider building with Intel64 compiler for the Windows x64 platforms and /arch:IA32 for the ancient 32-bit Windows.

I have tried all the options under the hood and all of them fail!
However, the program succeeds when i disable optimization i.e using od flag instead of o2.

I downloaded the trial version of Intel Compiler XE 12.0 and tried out. All options work with o2 as well as od. However, i ve decided to stick to QaxSSE4.1 option to cater to all processor types starting from Core 2 Duo upto Xeon E5550.

I am 100 percent sure that this is a bug in the intel compiler 11.1 since the same options which dont work in 11.1 work in 12.0 for all processors.

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions

Leave a Comment

Please sign in to add a comment. Not a member? Join today