https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #37 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Aug 3 11:50:39 2019
New Revision: 274038
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274038=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-08-03 Thomas Koenig
Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #36 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Aug 2 17:51:45 2019
New Revision: 274026
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274026=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-08-02 Thomas Koenig
Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #34 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Jul 30 19:11:03 2019
New Revision: 273913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273913=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-07-29 Thomas Koenig
Paul Thomas
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #33 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Jul 29 17:45:24 2019
New Revision: 273880
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=273880=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-07-29 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/90813
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #32 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
>
> --- Comment #31 from Thomas Koenig ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #31 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #30)
> So something is odd with how the frontend handles 'c_'.
>
> The symbol table has two:
>
> __f_MOD_c_/2 (c_) @0x7f763892d300
> Type: variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #30 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
>
> --- Comment #29 from Thomas Koenig ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #29 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #28)
> -fdump-tree-all-uid without the space
OK, so this works.
What we have in the *.004t.original dump is
fs ();
{
struct __class_f_S_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #28 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On July 7, 2019 2:59:29 PM GMT+02:00, "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
>
>--- Comment #27 from Thomas Koenig ---
>(In reply to Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #27 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #26)
> The odd thing is that for the Fortran example even the tree oracle claims
> the store doesn't alias the load...
>
> Because they are different variables!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
addis 9,2,.LC1@toc@ha
ld 9,.LC1@toc@l(9)
...
ld 9,0(9)
...
ld 10,0(9)
...
mtctr 10
...
bctrl
.LC1:
.quad __f_MOD_c_
So that symbol is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
Another data point.
If the test case is split across two files (the module separate
from the main program), then it works.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
I checked the *.optimized dump on POWER and x86_64 against each
other, and there are no differences (some renumbering of variables,
that's all).
Looking further...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64*-unknown-linux-gn |powerpc64*-unknown-linux-gn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #7)
> I think we can move this to NEW.
Please look at comment #10 to PR90786.
I am at a complete loss on this one.
What to do?
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #5 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi there,
That might well have pinpointed the problem sufficiently.
Thanks
Paul
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 20:18, seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So, adding in a -g3 I see:
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.
Backtrace for this error:
#0 0x3fffb7f80477 in ???
#1 0x1878 in MAIN__
at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I don't know Fortran but will try to get some more information about the
failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> See also https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-06/msg00034.html.
I have responded to Christophe on the above thread to the effect that I cannot
see anything
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
25 matches
Mail list logo
