https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100018
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following failures appeared between r11-7844 and r11-7872
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99838
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99817
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98201
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITIN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98201
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Could this PR be closed or moved to target component?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95998
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99183
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
Target Milestone: ---
Compiling the following variant of pr87907
module m
interface
module integer function g(x)
integer, intent(in) :: x
end
end interface
end
submodule(m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
/* Symbol flavors: these are all mutually exclusive.
12 elements = 4 bits. */
enum sym_flavor
{
FL_UNKNOWN = 0, FL_PROGRAM, FL_BLOCK_DATA, FL_MODULE, FL_VARIABLE,
FL_PARAMETER, FL_LABEL, FL_PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With a clean tree at r11-7872 I get
(lldb) b misc.c:309
Breakpoint 1: where = f951`gfc_code2string(mstring const*, int) + 26 at
misc.c:309:22, address = 0x00010008457a
(lldb) run pr96013.f90
Proc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > Sometime the test ICE with
> >
> > f951: internal compiler error: gfc_code2string(): Bad code
> >
> > which cannot be fixed by the patch in comment 6.
> >
>
> Don't know anything about libsantiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Sometime the test ICE with
f951: internal compiler error: gfc_code2string(): Bad code
which cannot be fixed by the patch in comment 6.
A sanitized version with the patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/piper
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99765
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-25
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99761
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96318
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99307
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The patch works for me. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99514
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-10
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99477
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57871
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> As this issue is about documentation, if I read the later comments correctly:
> Can you check whether the documentation is now sufficient or whether more is
> needed? > If so, what is needed? — If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Does the patch of comment 11 produce the expected result?
Quick test, yes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have changed the test in pr57871 comment 0 to
implicit none
integer,parameter:: p1 = 4, dp = kind(1d0)
print *,'kind(1.0_4) ',kind(1.0_4),'precision(1.0_4) ',precision(1.0_4)
print *,'kind(1.0_p1)'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|dominiq at lps dot ens.fr |
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99345
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
One also needs the files generating the needed modules.
Does the code compiles with -fno-frontend-optimize?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99355
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57871
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Note that after r11-7501 the test in comment O gives cat run time:
% gfc pr57871.f90 -freal-4-real-16
% ./a.out
kind(1.0_p1) 4 precision(1.0_p1) 6
kind(1.0_dp) 8 precis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81986
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
r11-7470 fixes the first runtime error, but I still see
../../../work/libgfortran/io/write.c:835:7: runtime error: negation of
0x8000 cannot be represented in type '__int12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81986
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99308
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99307
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-27
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99204
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-22
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96580
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99191
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59065
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
: sanitizer
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
iains at gcc dot gnu.org, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at
gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96724
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99171
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Summary|[10 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99171
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-20
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
A patch has been submitted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-January/055624.html
and approved at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-January/055644.html
More comments at
https:/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99148
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-20
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99145
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96418
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dominiq at lps dot e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98764
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95304
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-14
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94446
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97592
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98014
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-14
Status|UNC
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org, redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
After r11-7220 I see the following
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93787
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98408
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-14
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99027
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99065
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Bader at lrz dot de
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67744
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98979
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build|powerpc64*-linux-gnu|powerpc64*-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98890
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98883
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83927
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Seems fixed... I'll try to commit the test case this evening.
I still get
31 | M = v_array_par(1)%MyFunc()
| 1
Error: Cannot convert TYPE(mytype) to REAL(4) at (1)
with
module Typ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98825
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98472
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98738
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98808
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70949
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #4 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98787
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98573
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98565
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-20
Ever confirmed|0
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
Target Milestone: ---
Compiling the test gfortran.dg/associate_26.f90 with -fcoarray=lib gives an ICE
13 | associate (i => a(1:p,
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
Target Milestone: ---
Compiling the test gfortran.dg/coarray_alloc_comp_3.f08 with -fcoarray=single
gives an ICE:
43 | deallocate(obj%link
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98476
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98686
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88356
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Can't reproduce any of the issues in comment#0 and comment#1
> with current HEAD on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Confirmed for GCC10 r10-9193 and GCC11 r11-6032 and above.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98738
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Also on Darwin:
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: libgomp.c/../libgomp.c-c++-common/task-detach-6.c execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: libgomp.fortran/task-detach-6.f90 -O3 -fomit-fram
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98534
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-17
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93524
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98661
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
--- Comment #29 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> There's no testcase named "pr78746.f90" in the testsuite.
Ideed! My prx.f90 are in the test suite only when they are fixed.
Now my "pr78746.f90" is exactly charlen_03.f90.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89204
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94464
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86656
Bug 86656 depends on bug 78746, which changed state.
Bug 78746 Summary: charlen_03, charlen_10 ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89891
Bug 89891 depends on bug 78746, which changed state.
Bug 78746 Summary: charlen_03, charlen_10 ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98472
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-02
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98490
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98458
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The test compiles if I replace
print *, tmp
with
print *, tmp(3,1) ! or (6,1)
but it prints
1 2 2 3 3 4
instead of 2 or 4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
--- Comment #20 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> It's my impression that the code compiles also with -O2
> or -O3, which might be an interim solution until this
> bug is fixed.
I only get a different ICE:
19 | subroutine fun1(this, a)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The following test compiles (swapping fun1 and fun2):
module buggy
implicit none
type :: bar
integer :: x
end type bar
type :: foo
integer :: n
contains
procedure :: fun1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96986
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-14
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98263
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||89891
--- Comment #3 from Dominiq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93337
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Interesting, I made a valgrind version of gcc fortran.
> ...
My instrumented compiler gives
==67053==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free on address 0x60400eee
at pc 0x00010007eafc bp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97455
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-12
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86551
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The ICE is gone for GCC10.2.1 and 11.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-12
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98053
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97723
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97694
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35718
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68778
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I see the valgrind errors in comment 4 up to r241883 (2016-11-06). From r241924
(2016-11-07) up to r265319 (2018-10-19) I don't see them anymore but a lot of
MacOS related libraries. Finally after r265
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98203
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-08
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98201
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-08
Ever confirmed|0
101 - 200 of 7788 matches
Mail list logo