--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25835
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-29 06:18
---
Fixed on 4.1 and 4.2
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-29 03:58
---
Subject: Bug 25835
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jan 29 03:58:42 2006
New Revision: 110362
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110362
Log:
2006-01-28 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-29 03:50
---
Subject: Bug 25835
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jan 29 03:50:23 2006
New Revision: 110361
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110361
Log:
2006-01-28 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-25 01:39
---
Subject: Bug 25835
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jan 25 01:39:45 2006
New Revision: 110202
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110202
Log:
2006-01-24 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-25 01:29
---
Subject: Bug 25835
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jan 25 01:29:14 2006
New Revision: 110201
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110201
Log:
2006-01-24 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-25 01:19
---
Subject: Bug 25835
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Jan 25 01:19:11 2006
New Revision: 110200
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110200
Log:
2006-01-24 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-25 01:10
---
Once again Dale, Thanks a million! er uh two and a half million!
I will commit to 4.2 tonight.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25835
--- Comment #7 from dir at lanl dot gov 2006-01-24 14:40 ---
It looks like you got it ! It took some hours to grind through the 2.5 million
tests, but they all ran with out finding an error.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25835
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-24 05:05
---
I have confirmed Dale's discovery here which gave me the hint I needed. The
following patch fixes all the cases presented in comments above, passes
regression testing and passes NIST testing. No need for patch i
--- Comment #5 from dir at lanl dot gov 2006-01-23 15:20 ---
I think that the examples shown above now work. Here is the shortest new one to
fail - another bug I guess.
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -o write25 write25.f
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% write25
read EOF di
--- Comment #4 from dir at lanl dot gov 2006-01-23 14:44 ---
Adding a buffer flush to "fd_alloc_r_at" seems to helped a lot - it now passes
the 65000 tests of 8 at a time and the 1048576 10 at a time tests with a small
buffer, but fails some where in the 262144 tests of 9 at a time with
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-22 07:45
---
In the following case, the second read is failing to read anything and gives no
error, giving the impression that it is working if you don't look at the data.
Works for data size of 2044 or less. This bug is ugl
--- Comment #2 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-20 17:57 ---
Confirmed.
--
jb at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-18 02:12
---
The following chunk from fd_alloc is where the problem occurs. Get rid of
setting active to zero and the error goes away, but regression occurs in
direct_io_2.f90. Perhaps active needs to be set to zero somewhe
15 matches
Mail list logo
