Hi all, On 24/09/18 14:54, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Sep 22 2018, Janne Blomqvist <blomqvist.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:> +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "_gfortran_caf_lock \\(four.token, .*\\(1 - four.dim\\\[0\\\].lbound\\), \\(integer\\(kind=4\\)\\) \\(7 - four.dim\\\[1\\\].lbound\\), &acquired.\[0-9\]+, &ii, 0B, 0\\);|_gfortran_caf_lock \\(four.token, 1 - four.dim\\\[0\\\].lbound, 7 - four.dim\\\[1\\\].lbound, &acquired.\[0-9\]+, &ii, 0B, 0\\);" 1 "original" } } > +! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "_gfortran_caf_unlock \\(four.token, .*\\(2 - four.dim\\\[0\\\].lbound\\), \\(integer\\(kind=4\\)\\) \\(8 - four.dim\\\[1\\\].lbound\\), 0B, 0B, 0\\);|_gfortran_caf_unlock \\(four.token, 2 - four.dim\\\[0\\\].lbound, 8 - four.dim\\\[1\\\].lbound, 0B, 0B, 0\\);" 1 "original" } } This is wrong for ILP32.
To be more concrete, this FAILs on arm-none-linux-gnueabihf: FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray_lock_7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times original "_gfortran_caf_lock \\(four.token, .*\\(1 - four.dim\\[0\\].lbound\\), \\(integer\\(kind=4\\)\\) \\(7 - four.dim\\[1\\].lbound\\), &acquired.[0-9]+, &ii, 0B, 0\\);|_gfortran_caf_lock \\(four.token, 1 - four.dim\\[0\\].lbound, 7 - four.dim\\[1\\].lbound, &acquired.[0-9]+, &ii, 0B, 0\\);" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray_lock_7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times original "_gfortran_caf_unlock \\(four.token, .*\\(2 - four.dim\\[0\\].lbound\\), \\(integer\\(kind=4\\)\\) \\(8 - four.dim\\[1\\].lbound\\), 0B, 0B, 0\\);|_gfortran_caf_unlock \\(four.token, 2 - four.dim\\[0\\].lbound, 8 - four.dim\\[1\\].lbound, 0B, 0B, 0\\);" 1 Thanks, Kyrill
Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different."
