Re: [patch] Fix PR fortran/96983

2021-03-10 Thread Eric Botcazou
> I think it is a bad idea to hard-code the real type. > Does the following work for you? If so, I think that > patch is obvious and you can go ahead and commit it. > > --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c > +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c > @@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ build_round_expr (tree arg, tree

Re: [patch] Fix PR fortran/96983

2021-03-10 Thread Tobias Burnus
Hi, On 08.03.21 17:25, Eric Botcazou wrote: AFAICS the code in build_round_expr implicitly assumes that __float128 exists, which is *not* the common case among 64-bit architectures since "long double" is generally already 128-bit for them. Crossref: Introduced by the Patch for PR96711,

[patch] Fix PR fortran/96983

2021-03-08 Thread Eric Botcazou
Hi, AFAICS the code in build_round_expr implicitly assumes that __float128 exists, which is *not* the common case among 64-bit architectures since "long double" is generally already 128-bit for them. Tested on x86-64/Linux and SPARC64/Linux, OK for the mainline? 2021-03-08 Eric Botcazou