--- Comment #20 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 13:26 ---
> And did you set a breakpoint on fancy_abort?
If it has to be done explicitely, the answer is no. Doing it I get:
(gdb) break fancy_abort
Breakpoint 1 at 0xbf4ec: file ../../gcc-4.3-20070727/gcc/diagnostic.c, line
--- Comment #19 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-29 13:11
---
(In reply to comment #18)
> gdb /opt/gcc/gcc4.3l/libexec/gcc/powerpc-apple-darwin8/4.3.0/f951
And did you set a breakpoint on fancy_abort? ICE can be due either to GCC
catching a segfault signal (in which case,
--- Comment #18 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 12:59 ---
> You need to backtrace f951
Yes indeed: I did
gdb /opt/gcc/gcc4.3l/libexec/gcc/powerpc-apple-darwin8/4.3.0/f951
I have also noticed that I don't have any entry for today
in~/Library/Logs/CrashReporter/, while I h
--- Comment #17 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-29 12:44
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Program exited with code 04.
> (gdb) backtrace
> No stack.
You need to backtrace f951 (which is the compiler proper) instead of gfortran
(which is only the driver). Use "gfortran -v"
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 12:33 ---
gfortran.dg/bounds_check_5.f90
gfortran.dg/char_associated_1.f90
gfortran.dg/der_array_1.f90
gfortran.dg/ret_pointer_1.f90
ICE as associated_2_db:
bounds_check_5_db.f90:16: internal compiler error: in simplify_subr
--- Comment #15 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 12:21 ---
gfortran.dg/associated_2.f90
gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/intrinsic_associated.f90
gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/intrinsic_associated_2.f90
ICE with the same kind of error (cannot get any backtrace):
associa
--- Comment #14 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 11:44 ---
I have already started to investigate gfortran.dg/forall_4.f90. With -m32 it
does not ICE but abort due to the line
forall (i=1:n, .not. s(i)) a(i) = i
the '.not.' seems to be the problem (the corresonding output
--- Comment #13 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-29 11:19
---
>From your testresults, Dominique, I see the following testcases ICE:
gfortran.dg/altreturn_5.f90
gfortran.dg/associated_2.f90
gfortran.dg/bounds_check_5.f90
gfortran.dg/char_associated_1.f90
gfortran.dg/der_arr
--- Comment #12 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 11:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=13998)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13998&action=view)
test case failing with -m32, but not, or differently, with -m64
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 11:09 ---
The following test cases fail only with -m64, but not, or differently, with
-m32.
FAIL: gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_constructor_1.f90 -O0 execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_constructor_1.f90 -O1 execution te
--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 11:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=13997)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13997&action=view)
Failures on PPC Darwin8 common to -m32 and -m64
I attached the reduced list of the test cases failing with -m32
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-29 09:47
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Considering the number of failures to analyse, I think there is need to avoid
> duplicate efforts. What is the best way to proceed?
I've started a x86_64-linux testsuite with -fdefault
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 09:24 ---
Considering the number of failures to analyse, I think there is need to avoid
duplicate efforts. What is the best way to proceed?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32770
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 08:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=13996)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13996&action=view)
log and sum files for the tests with -fdefault-integer-8
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3277
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-29 08:10
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I have had a quick look and the cause of failures are quite different.
Could you please attach the files
/opt/gcc/darwin_buildl/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.sum and
/opt/gcc/darwin_b
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-29 08:01 ---
If you were expecting to be kept buzzy, you'll be glad! The summary is:
=== gfortran Summary for unix/-fdefault-integer-8//-m32 ===
# of expected passes18575
# of unexpected failures750
# of expe
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-28 14:18 ---
> (Full doc is available at http://gcc.gnu.org/install/test.html)
I have read it, but I got confused by:
"In order to run sets of tests selectively, there are targets `make check-gcc'
and `make check-g++' in the gcc
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-28 13:37
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I have looked for the way to run the testsuite on gfortran only, but did not
> find a way to
> do it. Could someone give me the right pointer? Also I'll need the directive
> to
> do the
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-07-28 13:27 ---
> I fixed the same kind of problems with MVBITS (it was PR32357). Maybe we
> should
> ask to Dominique Dhumières to test on ppc-darwin? (like, running the testsuite
> with -fdefault-integer-8)
I have looked for the
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-28 12:42
---
I fixed the same kind of problems with MVBITS (it was PR32357). Maybe we should
ask to Dominique Dhumières to test on ppc-darwin? (like, running the testsuite
with -fdefault-integer-8)
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot
20 matches
Mail list logo
