http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56776
Bug #: 56776
Summary: valgrind errors within ira
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56776
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45337
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-08-19 09:47:08
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41137
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2009-11-01 16:21:21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25621
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40958
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36933
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39304
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34640
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2009-12-18 14:45:13
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14741
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2006-04-23 17:57:20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35118
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56770
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31021
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37150
--- Comment #15 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-03-27 12:53:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 29738
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29738
maybe smaller testcase version ?
Attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-12-13 09:36:18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56706
Bug #: 56706
Summary: failure building CP2K at -flto -O3
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56706
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56706
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56681
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56688
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56674
Bug #: 56674
Summary: ICE in check_sym_interfaces
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56674
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56681
Bug #: 56681
Summary: [4.9 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check:
expected ssa_name, have var_decl in verify_ssa, at
tree-ssa.c:1008
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55309
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55309
--- Comment #48 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-02-22 13:55:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #47)
Interestingly, the symbolization/debuginfo seems to be completely broken :(
I've tried compiling
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56378
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-02-18 18:48:28 UTC ---
simplified testcase:
module t
use, intrinsic :: iso_c_binding
interface fvec2vec
module procedure int_fvec2vec
end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56244
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53852
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56244
Bug #: 56244
Summary: -O3 should imply -funroll-loops
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55469
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-02-07 05:57:43 UTC ---
This
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-02/msg00068.html
seems the same/similar issue. Was there consensus about the patch ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56159
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12821
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2008-12-08 19:34:48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56063
Bug #: 56063
Summary: last reconfirmed : now
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56063
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56054
Bug #: 56054
Summary: f951: internal compiler error: in gfc_free_namespace,
at fortran/symbol.c:3337
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56052
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50627
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56054
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50627
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Error recovery: ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #34 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-01-10 11:26:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
Can you sent it to review? You can also mention that it fixes issue 40362.
I had a closer look
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #50 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-01-08 17:26:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #49)
Fixed.
Thanks, for fixing this issue.
Shouldn't the PR be kept open to look into what I'm rather sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #32 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-01-07 21:35:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #30)
The formatting in the patch is wrong (multiple issues).
I've tried to fix them in the version below
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #28 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-01-01 17:13:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
For config/linux/ptrlock the changes are:
[...]
Following your suggestions, I applied the following
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #22 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-30 09:03:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
The obvious solution to this seems to be that also the OMP runtime (libgomp)
must be compiled
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #25 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-30 14:52:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #24)
For testing you can comment out first 2 lines of gomp_ptrlock_get(). That
should fix the race in libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #27 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-30 19:57:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #24)
For testing you can comment out first 2 lines of gomp_ptrlock_get(). That
should fix the race in libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #17 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-26 19:34:29 UTC ---
Another testcase that yields warnings with a sanitized libgomp:
!$omp parallel default(none) private(i,j,k)
!$omp do collapse(3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #15 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-25 19:30:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #12)
That's great that gcc tsan works for Fortran/OpenMP out of the box!
I'm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #16 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-25 20:23:07 UTC ---
many things appear to work fine, but seemingly parallel do loops with a dynamic
schedule generate warnings in libgomp. I also seem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29019|0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #46 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-23 19:45:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #45)
The point of failure is not in the object,
but in a routine called after a routine from this object
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55789
Bug #: 55789
Summary: Needless realloc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49241
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #44 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-22 20:53:41 UTC ---
I have made a some more progress in understanding the failure. I all compile
with
FCFLAGS = -O1 -g -ffree-form -fsanitize=address
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #39 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-21 08:02:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 29019
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29019
objdump of the offending routine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #40 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-21 08:03:49 UTC ---
After getting an asan instrumented libgfortran to work (thanks hjl, jakub), I'm
still getting the error message.
==66645== ERROR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #42 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-21 08:18:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #41)
Wild guess: does Fortran have any custom unwinding mechanism (like exceptions
in C++ or longjmp in C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #34 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-20 16:14:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
Using--with-build-config=bootstrap-asan should do that for you.
Seems like I'm doing something wrong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55371
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-20 19:55:32 UTC ---
Thanks now bootstrap completes.
It seems to me that libgfortran is not built with -fsanitize=address despite
--with-build-config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-20 20:05:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
bootstrap-asan is for bootstrapping GCC with -fsanitize=address
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55374
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-20 20:43:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
cd obj*/x86_64*/libgfortran; make clean; \
make CFLAGS=-std=gnu99 -g -O2 -fsanitize=address
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #16 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 08:17:15 UTC ---
After testing on CP2K, I believe that ASAN yields a false positive (current
trunk). It is obviously hard to be sure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #19 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 08:48:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
For whatever reason the fortran code is touching asan's shadow:
Address 0x16742e2c is located
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #22 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 08:59:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
And this is no reason at all, for most string/memory intrinsics asan
instruments them just by pretending
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #24 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 09:06:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
Example testcase:
looks definitely like what Fortran subroutines with 100 optional arguments
might
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #29 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 14:36:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
This time it looks like a valid error report (stack buffer overflow), but asan
crashes while reporting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #30 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 15:57:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #28)
I'd say as a first step try to make sure -lasan is linked at the very
beginning, before all other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #31 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 16:08:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
This time it looks like a valid error report (stack buffer overflow), but asan
crashes while reporting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #32 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-19 18:00:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #28)
I'd say as a first step try to make sure -lasan is linked at the very
beginning, before all other
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55591
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594
--- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-14 08:47:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
FWIW, you can get a backtrace by calling the ABORT intrinsic instead.
thanks... I'm using that now
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-07-09 09:36:18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
--- Comment #90 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-13 15:13:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #89)
Just to repeat, the ICEs are with checking enabled only (but possibly cover up
for wong-code).
I'm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|TSAN crashes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 12:37:00 UTC ---
I'm wondering, is asan not supposed to print out a backtrace with file names
and line numbers... right now (trunk of today) I get
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 12:43:42 UTC ---
Now, compilation seems to go fine, but I'm not figuring out how to do it
properly so it works at run time. I have:
gfortran -g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 12:53:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
gfortran -g -fsanitize=thread -fPIC -pie PR55561.f90
Thanks! yields the proper warning as expected
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 12:59:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Is is a correct report? Or false positive?
This is a correct report for the testcase in comment #0 (as J
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 13:19:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Joost:
http://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizer#Call_stack
No luck, even
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 13:26:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
./a.out | python ./asan_symbolize.py
It should be
./a.out 21 | python ./asan_symbolize.py
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #13 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 13:33:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Does pure addr2line work?
No, the following (-gdwarf-3) does work:
gfortran -gdwarf-3 -O0 -fsanitize
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #15 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 13:56:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
That means your addr2line is too old.
OK, with binutils 2.23.1 things work as expected. In particular
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #13 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-10 15:55:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
That's great that gcc tsan works for Fortran/OpenMP out of the box!
I'm afraid it yields false positives
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55585
Bug #: 55585
Summary: compile time hog at -O1 -fboundscheck -g
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55585
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55585
--- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-04 09:39:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
It's probably the very many calls. At -O2 VRP runs and eventually removes
most of them.
Unfortunately
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55585
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-04 10:43:10 UTC ---
Interestingly, the magic switch is -fstrict-aliasing... 20x speedup. for a
Fortran code quite a surprise.
time gfortran -c -O1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55591
Bug #: 55591
Summary: strict-aliasing Fortran
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55585
--- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-04 11:56:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
GFortran could enable strict-aliasing unconditionally if it likes (even
at -O0).
I have now opened
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
Bug #: 55561
Summary: TSAN crashes for Fortran
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-02 10:11:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Hmm, this seems to be caused by
Forced statement unreachable: pretmp_516 = coef_x[pretmp_515];
Forced
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2012-12-03 07:41:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Are you testing with all the pending unreviewed TSAN fixes?
Ah.. no, I will retest once they are in trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
Bug #: 5
Summary: [4.8 Regression] miscompilation at -O2
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
501 - 600 of 713 matches
Mail list logo