On 13/01/2025 14:57, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Here is an updated patch following your suggestion.
Thanks. It is not clear whether you are just waiting
for test result or not before committing it as obvious.
Thus, just in case: LGTM.
Thanks,
Tobias
Thanks for
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Here is an updated patch following your suggestion.
Thanks. It is not clear whether you are just waiting
for test result or not before committing it as obvious.
Thus, just in case: LGTM.
Thanks,
Tobias
Hi Tobias,
On 13/01/2025 13:24, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Added libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/dispatch-1.f90.
I see this new test case FAIL (execution test SIGSEGV) for most (but not
all) offloading configurations, both GCN and nvptx:
+PASS: l
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Added libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/dispatch-1.f90.
I see this new test case FAIL (execution test SIGSEGV) for most (but not
all) offloading configurations, both GCN and nvptx:
+PASS: libgomp.fortran/dispatch-1.f90 -O (test for excess
e
Hi Thomas,
On 08/01/2025 10:04, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi Paul-Antoine!
On 2024-12-16T19:35:01+0100, Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
On 15/11/2024 14:59, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
This patch adds support for the `dispatch` construct and the
`adjust_args` clause to the Fortran
Hi Paul-Antoine!
On 2024-12-16T19:35:01+0100, Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
> On 15/11/2024 14:59, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>> Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
>>> This patch adds support for the `dispatch` construct and the
>>> `adjust_args` clause to the Fortran front-end.
>>>
>>> Handling of `adjust_args` ac
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Folded everything in one patch. […]
Updated ChangeLog. […]
Thanks.
Rebased and amended accordingly. I believe I did the right thing but
please have a quick look to be sure.
...
Otherwise, LGTM. Thanks!
LGTM :-)
For libgomp.fortran/dispatch-3.f90, see just
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
On 27/12/2024 19:52, Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Running adjust-args-10.f90 manually exhibited a bug that no other
testcase triggered. So I fixed the bug; then moved adjust-args-10.f90
to the libgomp testsuite, renamed it to dispatch-3.f90 and made it
dg-run.
I
On 27/12/2024 19:52, Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
On 23/12/2024 21:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
For adjust-args-10.f90, I wonder whether it is sufficient as compile-
time only or whether it makes more sense to have a "dg-do run" to
check that type(C_ptr) value vs. not-value works. I think either is
f
Hi Tobias,
On 23/12/2024 21:04, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Replying to your last two messages here and attaching revised patches.
Regarding the C++ and ME patches:
==> 0003-C-fix.patch <==
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] C++ fix
==> 0004-ME-fixes.patch <==
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] ME
Hi PA,
(next try, for some reasons, my original email disappeared.)
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
Replying to your last two messages here and attaching revised patches.
Regarding the C++ and ME patches:
==> 0003-C-fix.patch <==
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] C++ fix
==> 0004-ME-fixes.patch <==
Subject:
Hi Tobias,
Replying to your last two messages here and attaching revised patches.
On 16/12/2024 22:34, Tobias Burnus wrote:
I have not looked in depth at the patch, but managed to
write C-ism code, which caused a segfault (due to a missing "call"),
after gfortran issued a reasonable error. Can
Hi all, hello PA,
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
See the revised patch attached and my comments below.
I have not looked in depth at the patch, but managed to
write C-ism code, which caused a segfault (due to a missing "call"),
Additional comments: Can you hoist the condition
Hi PA,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
See the revised patch attached and my comments below.
First, for Fortran patches, please also CC fortran@ besides gcc-patches@.
The original patch email can be found at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-December/671763.html
I have not looked in
Hi Tobias,
See the revised patch attached and my comments below.
On 15/11/2024 14:59, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
This patch adds support for the `dispatch` construct and the
`adjust_args` clause to the Fortran front-end.
Handling of `adjust_args` across translation un
Hi,
Paul-Antoine Arras wrote:
This patch adds support for the `dispatch` construct and the
`adjust_args` clause to the Fortran front-end.
Handling of `adjust_args` across translation units is missing due
to PR115271.
First, can you add a run-time test?
[I think it helps to have at least one
This patch adds support for the `dispatch` construct and the `adjust_args`
clause to the Fortran front-end.
Handling of `adjust_args` across translation units is missing due to PR115271.
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
* dump-parse-tree.cc (show_omp_clauses): Handle novariants and nocontext
17 matches
Mail list logo
