--- Comment #74 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 08:52
---
(In reply to comment #73)
> I've added PR 31021 to track some performance issue with gfortran on one of
> CP2K's kernels.
Thanks for your work, Joost. I wonder if you have done OpenMP testing, also (I
imagine th
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 09:57
---
Confirmed, but unless it's a regression for gfortran-4.0, it won't be fixed on
the 4.1 branch. It's already fixed on 4.2 and above, and it's not a regression
wrt g77.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org change
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30998
--- Comment #75 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-03-03 10:12 ---
> Joost. I wonder if you have done OpenMP testing, also (I
> imagine that, OpenMP being frequently broken on cp2k and gfortran being a free
> compiler OpenMP-capable, you might have tried it :)
No, haven't tried it yet
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:22
---
For what it's worth, here's my opinion: we don't want to have a zillion of
different versions of each library function. It might be worth doing for
functions that are expected to be called in hot spots of the user
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:24
---
Confirmed. I think CPU_TIME is a standard intrinsic, what is the standard name
for its argument?
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:28 ---
> what is the standard name for its argument?
F95 draft,
13.14.25 CPU_TIME (TIME)
So, only the documentation needs to be changed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30950
--- Comment #19 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:29 ---
Subject: Bug 28080
Author: paolo
Date: Sat Mar 3 10:29:14 2007
New Revision: 122502
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122502
Log:
2007-03-03 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libst
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:33
---
Confirmed, but frankly, I believe this could be closed as WONTFIX. It's a
missed optimization in a case that probably never happens.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:38
---
Confirmed. I thought I had fixed it, though. Backtrace is
(gdb) back
#0 pack_internal (ret=0xbfab6628, array=Variable "array" is not available.
)
at
/home/fxcoudert/gfortran_nightbuild/trunk/libgfortran/intr
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 10:43 ---
Subject: Bug 30882
Author: burnus
Date: Sat Mar 3 10:43:25 2007
New Revision: 122503
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122503
Log:
2007-03-03 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortra
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
--- Comment #16 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-03-03 11:50 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c/4076
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00171.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #7 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 12:06
---
Steven Bosscher had made significant progress on this, IIRC. Steven, what's the
status of your patches?
PS: as a minor improvement, we might want to give numeric types a more
Fortran-like name, with a patch such
This is with the Polyhedron Fortran Benchmark,
http://www.polyhedron.com/pb05/polyhedron_benchmark_suite.html
http://www.polyhedron.com/pb05/pb05.zip
The test is in ./pb06/lin/source/.
gfortran -g -O1 linpk.f90
./a.out
runs without any error.
gfortran -g -O2 linpk.f90
./a.out
gives a segmentatio
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 12:14
---
Created an attachment (id=13136)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13136&action=view)
Updated version of the patch in comment 2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25714
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 12:36
---
I also get the ICE on i686-linux. We get into compare_cases (resolve.c) and try
to compare op1->high and op2->low, but both are functions and not constants, so
the values in op1->high->value are meaningless, and c
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |burnus at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Last reconfirmed|2007-02-05 22:15:24 |2007-03
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 14:24
---
Patch below, currently regtesting.
Index: libgfortran/intrinsics/pack_generic.c
===
--- libgfortran/intrinsics/pack_generic.c (revision 12250
The following program fails to compile (it compiles fine under 4.1.2)
#include
class MyClass {
double x;
public:
MyClass(double X) : x(X) {}
MyClass(int I) : x(I) {}
friend bool operator&&(int i, const MyClass& Z);
};
inline bool operator&&(int i, const MyClass& Z) {
return int(Z.x) =
--- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 15:32 ---
Subject: Bug 15787
Author: manu
Date: Sat Mar 3 15:32:13 2007
New Revision: 122505
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122505
Log:
2007-03-03 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR c+
--- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 15:51 ---
Fixed in 4.3.0
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #38 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 15:52
---
Fixed on 4.3 and 4.2.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 16:38
---
Subject: Bug 31001
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sat Mar 3 16:37:54 2007
New Revision: 122507
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122507
Log:
PR libfortran/31001
* intrinsics/pack_g
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-03 17:23 ---
Well, certainly line 455 of ostream didn't change lately and in any case we are
implementing literally the condition in 27.6.2.3/4 of the standard. Also, I
should add that overloading operator&& isn't really a best practice
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-03 17:34 ---
By the way, avoiding operator&& would be easy, just change the condition to 2
nested ifs, but I want to be clear about the general issue, whether the library
is supposed to be always and everywhere robust wrt overloaded ope
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-03 18:09 ---
Oh well, a better fix would be inhibit implicit instantiation of the various
_M_insert, which we are exporting from the .so library. That is good anyway.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
Version|4.2.1 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 19:30
---
Subject: Bug 16513
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Mar 3 19:29:51 2007
New Revision: 122512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122512
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2007-03-01 Pet
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 19:31
---
Fixed in the upcoming 4.2.0 release.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 19:36 ---
Subject: Bug 31031
Author: paolo
Date: Sat Mar 3 19:36:20 2007
New Revision: 122513
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122513
Log:
2007-03-03 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #8 from doug dot gregor at gmail dot com 2007-03-03 19:50
---
Patch is here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00191.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30666
--- Comment #9 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-03-03 19:50 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 30666
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00191.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #24 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 20:55 ---
Is this actually now fixed or not? I see a 4.2 and a trunk commit. Can this bug
now be closed, is something missing or should it be checked in for 4.1?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30617
--- Comment #25 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-03-03 21:46 ---
> Is this actually now fixed or not?
No, it is not. The commits are for the side effect of test case
intrinsic_actual_2.f90 that has
been fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30617
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 21:47 ---
Confirmed, a regression from 4.0.x.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 21:50 ---
Confirmed, a regression from 3.3.3. I made sure in 3.3.3, we would warn about
the function if we removed the attribute noreturn so I know the warning works
for that case.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org change
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.1 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26122
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-03 22:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=13137)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13137&action=view)
example patch for cshift1
This is how a cleanup could look: Quote everything except
for the macros, which need
--- Comment #20 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-04 00:20 ---
Subject: Bug 28080
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Mar 4 00:20:26 2007
New Revision: 122518
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122518
Log:
2007-03-03 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libst
--- Comment #21 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-04 00:23 ---
Subject: Bug 28080
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Mar 4 00:23:23 2007
New Revision: 122519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=122519
Log:
2007-03-03 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libst
--- Comment #2 from tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-04 01:35 ---
I see this on x86_64 and ia64 too.
--
tbm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-04 01:42 ---
Fails here with 4.3 with:
internal compiler error: tree check: expected class 'expression', have
'exceptional' (error_mark) in build_min_nt, at cp/tree.c:1489
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23716
The bitfield-1.mm test case fails for me with 4.3 on ia64 with:
internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl with
RTL' structure, have 'field_decl' in assemble_external_real, at varasm.c:2225
--
Summary: [4.3 Regression] expected tree that contains 'decl wi
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-03-04 02:05 ---
Same on x86_64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31032
--- Comment #1 from TabonyEE at austin dot rr dot com 2007-03-04 02:25
---
For some reason, defining WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS prevents Combine from
transforming the HI load followed by the AND with 0xFF into a zero-extending QI
load. I don't know why this would be. I think not definin
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
First off, here's what I passed to the gcc configure script:
CC=gcc
CC="$CC" CFLAGS="" CXXFLAGS="" CPPFLAGS="" ../configure --prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info \
--enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release \
--with-system-zlib --disab
55 matches
Mail list logo
