From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailg110.ethz.ch (mailg110.ethz.ch [IPv6:2001:67c:10ec:5605::21]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A597E3858010 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:43:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org A597E3858010 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=student.ethz.ch Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=koenigni@student.ethz.ch Received: from mailm211.d.ethz.ch (2001:67c:10ec:5603::25) by mailg110.ethz.ch (2001:67c:10ec:5605::21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:43:10 +0100 Received: from [192.168.178.23] (89.0.164.24) by mailm211.d.ethz.ch (2001:67c:10ec:5603::25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:43:19 +0100 Subject: Re: Update on shared memory coarrays To: Paul Richard Thomas , Thomas Koenig CC: , "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" , Steve Kargl References: <3d57a473-4025-890d-d365-6c2f82e7f513@netcologne.de> <0e1c519febec1c47c411339269455b9d@free.fr> <7e332e70-246e-b44e-7689-477642bf114c@netcologne.de> <23f5fbb548e75b1a5029162b31a8ddd7@free.fr> <522f101eda4e212f98f1f071165a46e5@free.fr> <79fdfc28ee95e21ba173dad5780b4e02@free.fr> <83bd1f02-712c-37d0-d570-076372c9c5ff@netcologne.de> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Nicolas_K=c3=b6nig?= Message-ID: <3284de69-89f7-96ed-821d-fda3e523d69c@student.ethz.ch> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:42:53 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [89.0.164.24] X-ClientProxiedBy: mailm114.d.ethz.ch (2001:67c:10ec:5602::26) To mailm211.d.ethz.ch (2001:67c:10ec:5603::25) X-TM-SNTS-SMTP: 90D5A01BAF02D2EC4522DA4112F0DE843D1D9094874B434B8F70613E049A844C2000:8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, LIKELY_SPAM_FROM, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, SPAM_BODY, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: fortran@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Fortran mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:43:24 -0000 Hi Paul, On 23/12/2020 10:38, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > OK on the failures - I'll look out for the patch. Thomas suggested that patches for the branch should be posted to the mailing list. At the moment, I usually approve them via backchannels :D > > Is there a list somewhere of what has not been implemented but is > implemented in the existing coarrays library? Also, what is not > implemented from the standard? Thomas and I added a todo-list in the readme file in the libgfortran/caf_shared directory. We're currently looking at allocate with stat; the compiler is emitting some rather strange code there. It resets, depending on the uninitialized value of stat, some of the array bounds. Library side, the next task will be to add the library functions needed for implementing MOVE_ALLOC. Nicolas > > Many thanks for your stupendous effort on this > > I am going to tackle the fixes for my two recent patches that have hit > the buffers PR83118 (patch as of last night) and PR98022 (patch that > fixes it but removes all the work that I have put into it :-( ). I'll > post patches today. > > Paul > > > On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 09:10, Thomas Koenig > wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/caf-shared/scalar_alloc_1.f90 -pthread > > -fcoarray=shared  -O2  -lcaf_shared -lrt execution test > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/caf-shared/scalar_alloc_2.f90 -pthread  > > -fcoarray=shared  -O2  -lcaf_shared -lrt execution test > > I hope to have these patched today (depending on how the > Christmas preparations go :-) > > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/assumed_type_9.f90   -O2  execution test > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/assumed_type_9.f90   -Os  execution test > > That is an old failure, due to the fact that the branch hasn't > been updated to more recent trunk, where this no longer occurs. > > Best regards > >         Thomas > > > > -- > "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - > Albert Einstein