https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95150
--- Comment #4 from Chinoune ---
after some tests, It looks like it fails with only with small sizes.
The program doesn't crash when increasing matrices size. and It takes a shorter
time to execute!.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95150
--- Comment #3 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> * You compilation uses "-O0" – I do not know whether that's intended.
I didn't set any optimization flag, maybe the compiler default to "-O0".
>
> * I did not see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95150
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
Created attachment 48546
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48546=edit
debug ouput
: libgomp
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This is the reduced program:
$ cat matmul.F90
program main
implicit none
integer, parameter :: sp = selected_real_kind
: libgomp
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$cat prod.f90
program main
implicit none
integer, parameter :: sp = selected_real_kind(6,37)
integer, parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94464
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Since "coarrays" is part of Standard Fortran and not an experimental feature or
an extension, why putting it behind a flag?
There would be a flag
NCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Failed to build https://github.com/Goddard-Fortran-Ecosystem/pFUnit (which I
successfully built l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92736
--- Comment #4 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #3)
> On Sun, Dec 01, 2019 at 05:41:21AM +0000, chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
> wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92736
> >
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92736
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> Not sure the code is conforming, and don't have time to
> investigate (unless someone is willing to cough up $$).
>
> Workaround 1. Remove "use m1, only : i" in
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
gfortran recently start to reject this code :
module m1
implicit none
integer, parameter :: i = 10
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
Replacing `if( az
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Building this program with gcc [8,9] "-O1 -ffast-math" makes the result
overflows.
#include
#include
#include
#include
void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91337
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I have encountered some underflows/overflows in my code compiled with -Ofast,
and after
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This code throw an ICE
module m
implicit none
integer, parameter :: sp = selected_real_kind(6)
contains
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
On 7 Dec 2017 Bin Cheng had introduced a better implementation of
-floop-interchange
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00360.html
bou it looks like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82567
--- Comment #7 from Chinoune ---
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82567
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
gfortran gives an internal compiler error with this code :
PROGRAM OMP_BLOCK
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER :: I !,J
!$OMP PARALLEL DO !PRIVATE(J)
! Declaring j outside
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
gfortran takes about 11s to compile this simple subroutine with -O1 :
SUBROUTINE sub()
IMPLICIT NONE
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This forall construct is very slow comparing to other compilers:
PROGRAM FORALL_EXECUTION
IMPLICIT NONE
REAL, ALLOCATABLE :: A(:,:,:), B(:,:,:), C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82471
--- Comment #5 from Chinoune ---
I have just tried FORALL and it has the same problem :
FORALL(K=1:N, J=1:M, I=1:L) is much slower than FORALL(I=1:L, J=1:M, K=1:N).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82471
--- Comment #4 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> DO CONCURRENT :8.1975
> DO CONCURRENT : 0.28409
> ORDINARY DO : 0.11604
> ARRAY DO : 0.11808
but with me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82471
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1)
> There is a subtle problem with your test case, it is the
> ordering of the variables in the DO concurrent statement.
>
>
> DO CONCURRENT( K=1:N, J=1:M, I=1:L)
>
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
in this example do-concurrent is much slower than ordinary-do :
PROGRAM TEST_DO_SPEED
IMPLICIT NONE
REAL, ALLOCATABLE :: A(:,:,:), B(:,:,:), C(:,:,:)
REAL
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41991
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41991=edit
the program which reprod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
Chinoune changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41117|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
--- Comment #8 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #7)
> Fun fact: -flto also fixes it.
It fixes the first test not the second (comment #5)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
--- Comment #5 from Chinoune ---
Created attachment 41124
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41124=edit
the second test program
This is another test which fails with all the optimizations directives (except
-Og).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80304
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> WORKSFORME on x86_64-apple-darwin16 from 4.8 up to trunk (7.0):
>
>10.000 6.
>10.000 6.
>10.000
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41118
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41118=edit
the test program
the compiler gives this error:
Program received signal SIGS
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41117
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41117=edit
the test program
with gfortran my program generate different resu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79154
--- Comment #2 from Chinoune ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> (In reply to Chinoune from comment #0)
> > Created attachment 40550 [details]
> > the fortran program
> >
> > I tried to build the program (see attachment) with gfortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: chinoune.mehdi at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 40550
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40550=edit
the fortran program
I tried to build the program (see attachment) with gfortran (5.
36 matches
Mail list logo
