Hi There, I have been withholding the commit of this patch until I hear from you.
Regards Paul On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 at 08:48, Paul Richard Thomas < paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there, > > You detected a failure in gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90: > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O0 (test for excess > errors) > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O0 execution test > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O1 (test for excess > errors) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O1 execution test > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O2 (test for excess > errors) > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O2 execution test > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > ...snip... > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > ...snip... > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess > errors) > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -O3 -g execution test > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -Os (test for excess > errors) > PASS: gfortran.dg/class_transformational_2.f90 -Os execution test > > The stop message in the full log indicates a numeric error in the first > test. I am unable to reproduce the error. Adding deallocation of all the > allocated variables (which I should have done in the first place) and > running valgrind with -s shows no errors and no memory loss. > > I find it odd that it should fail once at -O1 and not at -O2 and higher. > Can you provide me with any insights; eg, by rerunning the testcase outside > of the dejagnu framework? > > Thank you for doing this testing, by the way, even if the failure is a bit > obscure at the moment. > > Best regards > > Paul > > _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list -- linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-toolchain-le...@lists.linaro.org
