https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81441
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
For our code, we see a slowdown (3%-7% depending on the user reporting) due to
the options -fpeel-loops and -ftracer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80817
--- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele
---
If I compile with -m32
gcc -std=c++11 -m32 -S -O3 test.cpp
I get
.cfi_startproc
subl$12, %esp
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
movl16(%esp), %ecx
fildq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80817
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
Using gcc 7.1 on x86, the following
#include
void increment_relaxed(std::atomic& counter) {
atomic_store_explicit(,
atomic_load_explicit(,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #37 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #36)
> #pragma GCC optimize ( "-Ofast -fvariable-expansion-in-unroller
> -funroll-loops" )
and really beneficial for larger matrices would be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #36 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #34)
> -Ofast does reorder execution..
> Opinions welcome.
That is absolutely OK for a matmul, and all techniques to get near peak
performance require that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
--- Comment #18 from Joost VandeVondele
---
since this PR, and the related PR77278 can presumably only be fixed by changing
libgfortran abi (at least if I understand Richard's suggestion for fixing
this). The announced major version bump of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77719
--- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to kugan from comment #5)
> Sent a patch to fix this at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-09/msg01760.html.
Thanks, add this line before the first IF statement to silence the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77719
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> I
> don't think the code is valid: spdim is an implicit real used uninitialized.
yeah, auto-reduced from valid code.
but thanks for confirming,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77719
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
recent trunk regression:
> cat bug.f90
SUBROUTINE urep_egr(erep,derep,surr)
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
REAL(dp), INTENT(in
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
> cat t.f90
LOGICAL FUNCTION F1(A,B)
REAL :: A,B
F1=(abs(A)<sqrt(B))
END FUNCTION
LOGICAL FUNCTION F2(A,B)
REAL :: A,B
F2=(A*A<B)
END
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50259
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71961
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele
---
This even gives wrong results at -O0 ...
> cat test.f90
INTEGER, DIMENSION(:,:), POINTER :: a
INTEGER, DIMENSION(:,:), ALLOCATABLE :: b
ALLOCATE(a(4,4),b(4,2))
a=1 ; b=2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71961
--- Comment #10 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #9)
> With a test case, it would be OK with me if somebody reverted the
> patch. I can then rework it to take care of that particular bug.
A revert would be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71961
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Created attachment 38939 [details]
> Candidate patch
Since this is a graphite fix, it might also fix PR71351 ?
: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
The following started regressing roughly July 7th/8th:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE d3_poly
INTEGER, PUBLIC, PARAMETER :: max_grad2=5
INTEGER, PUB
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69601
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-06-26 00:00:00 |2016-7-1
--- Comment #4 from Joost
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
overnight trunk regression:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE gauss_colloc
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
CONTAINS
SUBROUT
-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
Overnight trunk regression, requires LTO.
> cat bug.f90
MODULE util
INTERFACE sort
MODULE PROCEDURE sort_cv
END INTERFACE
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE sort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71414
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71142
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
recent trunk regression:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE k290
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
TYPE csym_type
INTEGER :: isy, nc
REAL(KIND=dp), DIMENSION(3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71230
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #10)
> I had a single file version of it, I'll try to recreate that once for our
> current version.
To use and compile the single file version try this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #10 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to kugan from comment #9)
> What application is this testcase from? I have a patch which I want to try.
This is from the CP2K code we develop, it is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
---
The following testcase is slightly different in that it leads to a segfault:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE xc_pbe
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE pbe_lsd_calc(rhoa, rhob, norm_drho,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
--- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele
---
reduced testcase
> cat bug.f90
MODULE xc_pbe
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
PRIVATE
PUBLIC :: pbe_lda_info, pbe_lsd_info, pbe_lda_eval, pbe_lsd_eval
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71252
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71230
--- Comment #10 from Joost VandeVondele
---
new testcase:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE ai_coulomb_test
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
INTERFACE
SUBROUTINE g2gemint(intabc,la_max,npgfa,zeta,a,lb_max,npgfb,zetb,b,&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71230
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> There is another bug in this function remaining.
I indeed see :
bug.f90:47:0:
SUBROUTINE eri_test (iw,error)
in pp_string, at pretty-print.c:937
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
today's trunk:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE xc_b97
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
PRIVATE
PUB
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71230
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
A recent trunk regression leads to :
> gfortran -c -O1 -ffast-math bug.f90
bug.f90:6:0:
SUBROUT
ion
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
just noticed in some legacy code the equivalent of this construct:
REAL FUNCTION mysign(x)
REAL :: x
mysign=x/abs(x)
END FUNCTION
which I would expect to be conver
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
recent trunk regression:
> cat bug.
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
overnight regression in trunk:
> cat bug.f90
SUBROUTINE dbcsr_test_read_args(narg, args)
CHARACTER(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68715
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to vries from comment #6)
> Created attachment 37976 [details]
> tentative patch, fixes examples from comment 4 and 5.
also fixes the first testcase, thanks!
For whatever reason I had to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69601
--- Comment #2 from Joost VandeVondele
---
same issue for March
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69987
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
an overnight regression on trunk, which I'll tr to reduce:
/data/vjoost/gnu/cp2k/cp2k/makefiles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69695
--- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #2)
> This seems to be allowed, see 12.5.2.7:
Interesting, so that's a F2008 feature. The Cray compiler indeed gets this
right.
> So this is probably a plain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69601
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com,
: fastjar
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
The following testcase:
> cat test.f90
module point
implicit none
type point_type
integer, dimension(:,:), pointer :: array
end type point_type
conta
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
This testcase related to Janus question on the ml :
> cat test.f90
WRITE(6,*) BGE(1,2)
END
yields three times a similar warning with -Wintrinsics-std
> gfort
: web
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
The current/ redirect as in e.g. :
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/current/
doesn't seem to redirect to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/ at the
right
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
---
I'm somewhat surprised graphite regressions get a P4.
Discussions on the list suggested that graphite would be enabled by default in
the near future. Lowering graphite regression priority to 'not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66461
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68829
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69154
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68993
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4)
>
> I would urge anyone trying to be clever to use clear syntax:
>
https://github.com/hfp/libxsmm/commit/cc308fc5debe6151157a4fa9efacc7aa03351283
is what
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68993
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
I'm not 100% sure what the right answer is, i.e. if MERGE is defined by the
standard to do something special with respect to evaluating its arguments. The
origin is code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #10)
> This PR is tagged as a regression. Has anyone determined when it last
> worked or is it longstanding bug uncovered by recent non-fortran fe changes?
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
Currently, switching from -O3 to -Ofast might result in segfaulting Fortran
programs:
> cat test.f90
MODULE foo
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68002
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39772
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|add a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55916
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68715
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2015-12-5
CC|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
not a dup of PR68693:
> cat bug.f90
SUBROUTINE se_core_core_interaction(calculate_for
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
> cat bug.f90
MODULE spme
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
PRIVATE
PUBLIC :: get_patch
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE get_patch ( part, box, green, npts, p, rhos, is_c
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
> cat bug.f90
MODULE dbcsr_index_operations
INTERFACE dbcsr_build_row_index
END INTERF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68693
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2015-12-4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68692
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2015-12-4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68550
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Sebastian Pop from comment #5)
> fixed
BTW, with this fixed, I can compile our CP2K code with -floop-nest-optimize at
various -Ox and all seems correct. Thanks!
I'll try to integrate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68550
--- Comment #2 from Joost VandeVondele
---
The following simpler looking testcase fails at -O1:
> cat bug.f90
SUBROUTINE PD2VAL(RES,NDERIV,TG1,TG2,C0)
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
REAL(KIND=dp), INTENT(OUT) :: res(*)
REAL(KIND=dp),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #10 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9)
> Though with the testcase you gave we warn at both -O0 and -O1:
yes, but unfortunately, -Wuninitialized, also warns for 'may be used
uninitialized'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68641
--- Comment #12 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #11)
> That sounds like a bug. It works for me on a simple C testcase.
sorry, fat fingers on my side. So, yes, this works
gfortran -c -Werror=uninitialized
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
This is an enhancement request. Using -O1 and higher, undefined variables are
considered equal to 0 in optimization. This leads to code compiling at -O1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38312
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
Today's trunk produces a lot of warnings / notes all referring to functions
from libgfortran, when compiling CP2K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649
--- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele
---
Grepping the list of 'note:' in our build process, it triggers for at least
these functions:
_gfortran_matmul_r8
_gfortran_reshape_4
_gfortran_reshape_c4
_gfortran_reshape_c8
_gfortran_reshape_r4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38312
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
trunk regression:
> cat bug.f90
SUBROUTINE makeCoulE0(natorb,Coul)
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: dp=8
REAL(KIND=dp), PARAMETER :: fourpi=432
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68600
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68540
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
current trunk lead to wrong code for the following testcase if
-floop-nest-optimize is used:
> cat test.f90
MODULE t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68565
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2015-11-26
CC|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
overnight regression with current trunk:
> cat bug.f90
MODULE qs_efield_berry
TYPE cp_error_type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68453
--- Comment #3 from Joost VandeVondele
---
at r230923 this testcase seems not to fail anymore. Should this be closed as
fixed (maybe after adding the testcase ?)
I ran into a new ICE however, but I'll open a PR once I have this reduced.
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
graphite-triggered ICE in current trunk.
> cat bug.f90
SUBROUTINE integrate_core_1(grid,coef_xyz,pol_x,po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68453
--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Sebastian Pop from comment #4)
> fixed in r230918
Thanks!
I think if you make the changelog part of the commit message (in particular the
line containing PR tree-optimization/68453) an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68379
--- Comment #2 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> *** Bug 68575 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The testcase in PR68575 doesn't require avx, so might be useful for the
testsuite.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68379
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|aarch64 |aarch64,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68432
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #10)
> Series finally posted here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg03020.html
>
> Sorry for the delay.
Many thanks for fixing this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #29 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #27)
> (In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #22)
> If the compiler turns out not to be reasonably smart, file a bug report :-)
what is needed for large
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59302
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #22 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #21)
> I assume that for small matrices bordering on the silly
> (say, a matrix multiplication with dimensions of (1,2) and (2,1))
> the inline code will be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68279
--- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Sebastian Pop from comment #5)
> After fixing the graphite fail, I get these warnings from the testcase in
thanks, these are due to reducing the testcase stripping variable definitions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #20 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #19)
> If I can get something working I am thinking something like
> -fexternal-blas-n, if -n not given then default to current libblas
> behaviour. This way
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #18 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #17)
> I have done some experimenting. Since gcc supports OMP and I think to some
> extent ACC why not come up with a MATMUL that exploits these if present?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68432
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68279
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2015-11-20
--- Comment #4 from
1 - 100 of 713 matches
Mail list logo
