https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
Bug 84141 depends on bug 84155, which changed state.
Bug 84155 Summary: [8 Regression] program hangs on valid code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84155
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #38 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 10 18:16:14 2018
New Revision: 257550
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257550&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-02-10 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/84141
PR fortran/8415
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #37 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi Richi,
> So the fix quite possibly only papers over the problem in general
> - it changes to use a new, non-cached variant in this place but I see
> many more callers to gfc_get_dt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
Bug 84141 depends on bug 84155, which changed state.
Bug 84155 Summary: [8 Regression] program hangs on valid code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84155
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
Bug 84141 depends on bug 84155, which changed state.
Bug 84155 Summary: [8 Regression] program hangs on valid code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84155
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #35 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 3 14:06:44 2018
New Revision: 257356
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257356&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-02-03 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/84141
PR fortran/8415
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #34 from Jürgen Reuter ---
So, to summarise all of our code, at least our basic and extended tests, work
again with this (second) patch by Paul Thomas, for all different kind types of
our default reals (64, 80, emulated 128 bit). Than
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #33 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Mea culpa. I had to recompile the external libraries again. Then those tests
depending on the external libraries did also work (headbang).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #32 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #31)
> Unfortunately, the problem with our external libraries still persist. Don't
> know how to provide you with a test case for this without providing our
> complete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #31 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Unfortunately, the problem with our external libraries still persist. Don't
know how to provide you with a test case for this without providing our
complete code and their external complete code. :(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #30 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Yep, that looks good. Paul's fix is now the change in trans-array.c only, or
still the change in trans-io.c ? I guess only the trans-array.c patch. I'll try
it out later tonight.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #29 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #24)
> Created attachment 43322 [details]
> Additional failing test case (after the prelim. fix)
>
> This is still lengthy, and I can reduce it further but maybe the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #28 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 43329
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43329&action=edit
Shortened test case (after prelim. fix)
This is a shortened test case that still failed after the first prelim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #27 from Paul Thomas ---
Please see PR84155 for a fix that looks somewhat cleaner but note the caveat
associated with it.
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #26 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Paul, let me know whether you want me to reduce the "Additional failing test
case" any further. Really have to go to sleep now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #25 from Jürgen Reuter ---
The other errors actually appear in I/O procedures of external libraries that
we link to our code. It would be hard(er) to come up with a test case here.
Hope you can fix all of that, keeping fingers crossed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #24 from Jürgen Reuter ---
Created attachment 43322
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43322&action=edit
Additional failing test case (after the prelim. fix)
This is still lengthy, and I can reduce it further but ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #23 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi Everybody,
I just got in from the lab.. Obviously, I will not be working on this
problem tonight!
I suspect that fact that I have had to pick out allocatable components
for specia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #22 from Jürgen Reuter ---
I'm actually running our code right now. It fixes _almost all_ of our unit and
functional tests. There is still one failing unit test and at least one failing
functional test. Still waiting for the full resu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #21 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> A temporary fix:
> ...
Preliminary tests look good! Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
--- Comment #20 from Paul Thomas ---
A temporary fix:
Index: ../trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c
===
*** ../trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c (revision 257261)
--- ../trunk/gcc/fortran/t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84141
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Summary|[8.0.1 regression
24 matches
Mail list logo