[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #10 from Gaius Mulley --- > I'm optimistically changing the version of the bug from 12 to 14 and closing > it. Right, that was my intent ;-) > Feel free to re-open if this was misjudged. I suspect this patch is a > candidate for back porting to 13. It wouldn't hurt given that it's low-risk. However, I'm concentrating on 14 right now to finally get cleaner results on Solaris. Thanks.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 Gaius Mulley changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Version|12.0|14.0 Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED --- Comment #10 from Gaius Mulley --- I'm optimistically changing the version of the bug from 12 to 14 and closing it. Feel free to re-open if this was misjudged. I suspect this patch is a candidate for back porting to 13. Thanks for the bug report.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #9 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4b9bde5903d80ad8a30f5e7ecb6fc4208290 commit r14-9236-g4b9bde5903d80ad8a30f5e7ecb6fc4208290 Author: Gaius Mulley Date: Thu Feb 29 13:42:30 2024 + PR modula2/102344 TestLong4.mod FAILs This is a testsuite fix for TestLong4.mod so that it succeeds on 32 bit systems. The original TestLong4.mod has been rewritten as testing MAX(LONGCARD) into the variable l. The new testlong4.mod has been added to cpp/pass. The new testcode uses the C preprocessor to select the appropriate constant literal depending upon __SIZEOF_LONG__. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR modula2/102344 * gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod: Rewrite. * gm2/cpp/pass/testlong4.mod: New test. Signed-off-by: Gaius Mulley
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- Looks good: I've just tested both testcases on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and sparc-sun-solaris2.11 (both 32 and 64-bit). Everything PASSes just fine. Thanks.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #7 from Gaius Mulley --- Created attachment 57575 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57575=edit Proposed fix Here is a proposed fix - it adds a new testlong4.mod test inside the extensions/cpp directory and conditionally compiles the correct constant value for the sizeof long.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Ever confirmed|0 |1 Resolution|FIXED |--- Last reconfirmed||2024-02-28 --- Comment #6 from Rainer Orth --- Unfortunately, the test still FAILs for 32-bit configurations like i386-pc-solaris2.11 or sparc-sun-solaris2.11 with -m32 or x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with -m32: FAIL: gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod, -O FAIL: gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod, -O -g FAIL: gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions FAIL: gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod, -Os FAIL: gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod, -g /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/gcc/testsuite/gm2/pim/pass/TestLong4.mod:26:6: warning: attempting to assign a value '9223372036854775808' to a designator 'l' which will exceed the range of type 'LONGCARD'
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn --- Gaius reports fixed.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley --- > apologies if this is the wrong way to mention a status change. (Is this > done on bugzilla? I've looked and cannot see how to change its status > :-). The customary way is to change the Status to CONFIRMED once you've verified the report is correct. Once you start working on a fix (or intend to), assign the PR to yourself. When the fix is done and has been committed, change the Status to RESOLVED. Please add a PR reference for the fix to the ChangeLog entry as described in https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#ChangeLogs e.g PR modula2/102344 This way, the PR is automatically updated with a reference to the commit. > I'd like to confirm the bug and report that it is now fixed (I believe) in the > git repro. I've moved TestLong4.mod to the pass directory, Thanks. I'll try another build of the branch once I get around to it.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley --- "ro at gcc dot gnu.org" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 > > Bug ID: 102344 >Summary: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs >Product: gcc >Version: 12.0 > Status: UNCONFIRMED > Severity: normal > Priority: P3 > Component: modula2 > Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org > Reporter: ro at gcc dot gnu.org > CC: gaiusmod2 at gmail dot com > Target Milestone: --- > > The gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod test FAILs everywhere, it seems (seen on > i386-pc-solaris2.11 and x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, both 32 and 64-bit): > > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -g > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O -g > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -Os > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions > > The test is expected to FAIL, it seems, but actually compilation completes > without error. So this should actually be an XPASS instead. apologies if this is the wrong way to mention a status change. (Is this done on bugzilla? I've looked and cannot see how to change its status :-). I'd like to confirm the bug and report that it is now fixed (I believe) in the git repro. I've moved TestLong4.mod to the pass directory, regards, Gaius regards, Gaius
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley --- moved file in the git repro branch and pushed.
[Bug modula2/102344] gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 --- Comment #1 from Gaius Mulley --- "ro at gcc dot gnu.org" writes: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102344 > > Bug ID: 102344 >Summary: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod FAILs >Product: gcc >Version: 12.0 > Status: UNCONFIRMED > Severity: normal > Priority: P3 > Component: modula2 > Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org > Reporter: ro at gcc dot gnu.org > CC: gaiusmod2 at gmail dot com > Target Milestone: --- > > The gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod test FAILs everywhere, it seems (seen on > i386-pc-solaris2.11 and x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, both 32 and 64-bit): > > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -g > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O -g > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -Os > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > FAIL: gm2/pim/fail/TestLong4.mod, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions > > The test is expected to FAIL, it seems, but actually compilation completes > without error. So this should actually be an XPASS instead. yes indeed it should be XPASS - I'll move this into the pass directory. regards, Gaius
