--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-29 07:20 ---
I have changed the designation of this PR to normal/missed-optization, so that
comment #10 from Roger-Sayle is kept "live".
Otherwise this is fixed on trunk and 4.2.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-29 07:16 ---
Subject: Bug 31711
Author: pault
Date: Sun Apr 29 07:16:45 2007
New Revision: 124270
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124270
Log:
2007-04-29 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-29 06:31 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Can this go into gcc 4.2?
>
Steven, It's not strictly a regression. Mark is on vacation right now, so I
cannot get a yeah or nay from him. By popular acclaim, I have decided to
declare i
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-29 06:10 ---
Subject: Bug 31711
Author: pault
Date: Sun Apr 29 06:10:22 2007
New Revision: 124269
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124269
Log:
2007-04-29 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-28 21:32 ---
Can this go into gcc 4.2?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2007-04-27 18:20 ---
Paul's fix looks correct to me. It appears that when the "#if 0" was added
to disable broken loop shifting at some point in the distant past, the critical
functionality.
if (nDepend)
break;
was accidentally remo
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-27 17:27 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
The patch below seems too simple to be true - it fixes the problem, I guess it
will regtest but we will have to see what it does to performance. If you look
at it, it is potentially rather hor
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-27 07:01 ---
Hi Roger,
I'm adding you to the CC list on this PR on Paul T.'s
suggestion. You are one of our dependency experts, so
maybe you can do something about this :-)
Thomas
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #7 from paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2007-04-26 23:04 ---
Subject: Re: rhs array is changed while assiging to same
lhs array
Thomas,
It's some trivial failure of the logic in gfc_dep_resolver. I took a
quick look but did not see it because I am totally exhausted. I'll
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-26 21:31 ---
Nasty.
Paul, I've added you to the CC list because you probably
know more about the scalarizer than most. Just in case :-)
Thomas
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-26 20:50 ---
> This can be seen in the file (result.dat) generated by the program.
I missed that part. Reduced test:
program laplsolv
IMPLICIT NONE
integer, parameter :: n=10
double precision,dimension(0:n
11 matches
Mail list logo
