[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #21 from Martin Jambor 2011-02-09 11:48:47 UTC --- Fixed.
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 --- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor 2011-02-09 11:48:11 UTC --- Author: jamborm Date: Wed Feb 9 11:48:09 2011 New Revision: 169964 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169964 Log: 2011-02-09 Martin Jambor PR middle-end/45505 * tree-sra.c (struct access): New flags grp_scalar_read and grp_scalar_write. Changed description of assignment read and write flags. (dump_access): Dump new flags, reorder all of them. (sort_and_splice_var_accesses): Set the new flag accordingly, use them to detect multiple scalar reads. (analyze_access_subtree): Use the new scalar read write flags instead of the old flags. Adjusted comments. * testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90: Remove xfails. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 trunk/gcc/tree-sra.c
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org |gnu.org | --- Comment #19 from Martin Jambor 2011-02-08 14:15:53 UTC --- I have posted a proposed fix to the mailing list: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg00538.html
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 Ulrich Weigand changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #18 from Ulrich Weigand 2011-01-29 17:55:51 UTC --- The test case XPASSes on spu-*-* as well.
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 --- Comment #17 from Gerald Pfeifer 2011-01-29 11:57:55 UTC --- Thanks, Dominique. I think it'll be great if you can add i386-*-freebsd*. I'll be happy to test a patch, but I think in this specific case it's just fine if you commit and we'll have my nightly tester pick it up.
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dave.ang...@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca,
||gerald at pfeifer dot com,
||pthaugen at us dot ibm.com,
||ro at CeBiTec dot
||Uni-Bielefeld.DE
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-29 11:23:41 UTC ---
The test "XPASSes" with -m32 on *86*-apple-darwin* (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02532.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02281.html ).
The following patch cleans it.
--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f902010-09-07
15:25:44.0 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f902011-01-09 14:13:01.0
+0100
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ implicit none
contains
- function baz(arg) result(res) ! { dg-warning "res.yr' may be" "PR45505" {
xfail ilp32 } }
+ function baz(arg) result(res) ! { dg-warning "res.yr' may be" "PR45505" {
xfail { ilp32 && { ! *86*-apple-darwin* } } } }
type(bar), intent(in) :: arg
type(bar) :: res
logical, external:: some_func
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ contains
else
res = arg
end if
- end function baz ! { dg-bogus "res.yr' may be" "PR45505" { xfail ilp32 } }
+ end function baz ! { dg-bogus "res.yr' may be" "PR45505" { xfail { ilp32 &&
{ ! *86*-apple-darwin* } } } }
end module foo
Note also that this is also true for some hppa*-*-* and i386-unknown-freebsd9.0
(see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02550.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02368.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02365.html ),
while the test fails on alpha-dec-osf5.1b and on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
with -m64 (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02158.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-01/msg02626.html ).
I can adjust the above patch for these cases (and put *86* in a more canonical
form), but I am not able to test it for these platforms.
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 --- Comment #15 from Martin Jambor 2011-01-06 16:41:34 UTC --- I've played around with this a bit more and came to the conclusion that we could refine SRA heuristics some more to not scalarize this if we added two more attributes to struct access, one meaning "read as a scalar" and another for "written as a scalar." (I'm quite confident this would work, I have a different patch that works too but it uses a rather ad-hoc approach). However, I'm not sure whether we should be adding more attributes when we have already quite a few just in order to be able to make slightly better judgments about single-field structures like this one. (Maybe we really could have a location for return instead?). In either case, it is nothing for stage4. BTW, is this even a 4.6 regression?
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 --- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth 2010-11-17 21:16:40 UTC --- Interestingly, on x86_64-apple-darwin10, when using a --enable-build-with-cxx bootstrap, these tests change to... XPASS: gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 -O PR45505 (test for warnings, line 13) XPASS: gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 -O PR45505 (test for bogus messages, line 22) I don't see the same behavior with a --enable-build-with-cxx bootstrap on x86_64 Fedora10 however.
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P2 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-08 08:24:22 UTC --- I don't think this is a P1, the warning is reported, just with differing locus.
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 Jack Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||howarth at nitro dot ||med.uc.edu --- Comment #12 from Jack Howarth 2010-10-08 19:27:23 UTC --- I have been seeing this XPASS on x86_64-apple-darwin10 at -m32... Executing on host: /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../gfortran -B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/../../ /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20101007/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 -O -O -Wuninitialized -S -m32 -o pr25923.s(timeout = 300) /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20101007/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90: In function 'baz':^M /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20101007/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90:13:0: warning: 'res.yr' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized]^M output is: /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20101007/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90: In function 'baz':^M /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20101007/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90:13:0: warning: 'res.yr' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized]^M XPASS: gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 -O PR45505 (test for warnings, line 13) XPASS: gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 -O PR45505 (test for bogus messages, line 22) PASS: gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90 -O (test for excess errors) Is that expected?
[Bug middle-end/45505] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/pr25923.f90
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45505 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Component|fortran |middle-end
