https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Technically, this patch only adds '{ dg-do run }' which has the effect that the
code is not only run once but multiple times with different compiler options
(-O1, -O2 etc.).
Your code fails to execute with -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> As you could nail it down to a single commit, I assume, you could reproduce
> the problem – still, I am completely lost why it fails for you at -O0. Can
> you try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There are 222 stops in there. Is there an easy way I can catch any of them
that fire? Just running in gdb shows this spawns a bunch of threads and it
looks like one of them is what is stopping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Nov 4 10:01:22 2019
New Revision: 277769
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=277769&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
libgomp/testsuite - use unique numbers with Fortran's 'stop'
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #3)
> Is there an easy way I can catch any of them that fire?
Now fixed by using unique numbers in libgomp/testsuite.
But replacing 'stop' by 'error stop' is one option - th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openmp
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #6)
> On powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu
I can reproduce it on a powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu w/o real offloading. It
fails here for subroutine test_dummy_opt_val_cal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #8)
In gdb [GNU gdb (Ubuntu 7.7.1-0ubuntu5~14.04.3) 7.7.1], which is really not the
newest, I get:
(gdb) pt c_aptr
type =
and stepping in, gives (all variables shoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus ---
The callee is:
>
and the hidden argument (_c_aptr) is:
constant 1>
which both look fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus ---
Optimized dump is:
void * c_bptr;
void * c_aptr;
real(kind=8) * bptr;
real(kind=8) bb;
real(kind=8) * aptr;
real(kind=8) aa;
real(kind=8) aa.1_1;
real(kind=8) bb.2_2;
:
aa.1_1 = aa;
bb.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 47223
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47223&action=edit
-fdump-rtl-expand for test case in comment 9, compiled on
powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu using -O0 (it doesn't f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus ---
If the actual argument is itself optional but without value attribute,
gfc_conv_expr_present returns a 'logical_type_node' (default-integer size,
typically 4 bytes type) instead of a boolean_type_node (1 byt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus ---
The mentioned patch (for a related case but not relevant for this bug) is now
committed as r278114, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00990.html
Regarding the issue in this bug: Janne pointe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #16 from Tobias Burnus ---
Recap (see comment 11): Callee's arguments are
(aa, bb, c_aptr, c_bptr, aptr, bptr, _aa, _bb, _c_aptr, _c_bptr)
i.e. 2 real(kind=4)/float variables, 4 pointers and 4 Booleans.
And the call is
(aa.1_1, bb.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, to sum up, in #c9 we are (or want to do) in Fortran roughly what in C we
would do with:
void foo (double aa, double bb, void *c_aptr, void *c_bptr, double **aptr,
double **bptr, _Bool _aa, _Bool _bb, _Bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92305
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I believe this is a FE bug, for these functions TYPE_ARG_TYPES of the
FUNCTION_TYPE show just 6 arguments and don't include those 4 extra boolean
args for the scalar optional dummy vars, and as the function
19 matches
Mail list logo
