* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-13 21:20 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-13 21:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (19 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-13 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |4.3.4 4.4.2 4.5.0
Known to work| |4.2.1
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-13 21:20 ` [Bug fortran/42736] " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-13 21:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-13 22:27 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (18 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-13 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-13 21:24 -------
Created an attachment (id=19584)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19584&action=view)
Test case by Armelius Cameron
Add testcase (slightly modified to initialize the variables & check the
result).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-13 21:20 ` [Bug fortran/42736] " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-13 21:25 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-13 22:27 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-14 10:06 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (17 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-13 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-13 22:26 -------
I think there is an off by one problem in the call to assign_lv_real; that also
matches the problem shown by gdb:
Breakpoint 2, assign_lv_real (lefthandside=Cannot access memory at address
0x1e141b0
(gdb) pt lefthandside
type = real(kind=4)
(gdb) p righthandside
$2 = ( 42 )
Looking at the dump, one finds:
! data.2 is memcopy of parm.1.data = table->realdata.data
atmp.2.data = (void * restrict) data.3;
atmp.2.dim[0].stride = 1;
D.1596 = -atmp.2.dim[0].stride;
D.1598 = NON_LVALUE_EXPR <atmp.2.dim[1].stride> + D.1596;
D.1599 = NON_LVALUE_EXPR <table->realdata.dim[1].stride> + D.1567;
assign_lv_real (&(*(real(kind=4)[1] * restrict) atmp.2.data)[S.4 +
D.1598], &D.1601);
While table->realdata.dim[...].stride has for both [0] and [1] the stride set
to 1, atmp.2 only has "atmp2.dim[0].stride" set thus atmp.2.dim[1].stride is
either 0 or some other random value.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-13 22:27 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-14 10:06 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-14 10:56 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (16 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-14 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:06 -------
Looking at my old builds,
it seems to work with 2008-11-14-r141848
but it fails with 2008-11-18-r141960
Thus possible regression-causing patches:
PR 38033 - Bounds of a pointer/allocatable array not stabilized
PR 35681 - wrong result for vector subscripted array expression in MVBITS
Less likely:
PR 38119 - [4.4 Regression] character ICE in gfc_trans_create_temp_array
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-14 10:06 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-14 10:56 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-14 11:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-14 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:56 -------
Regression bisecting on the 4.3 branch shows that PR 35681 is the culprit; to
be precise: Commit Rev. 142154 - maybe that helps to find the issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=142154
PR fortran/35681
* dependency.c (gfc_check_argument_var_dependency): Add
elemental check flag. Issue a warning if we find a dependency
but don't generate a temporary. Add the case of an elemental
function call as actual argument to an elemental procedure.
Add the case of an operator expression as actual argument
to an elemental procedure.
(gfc_check_argument_dependency): Add elemental check flag.
Update calls to gfc_check_argument_var_dependency.
(gfc_check_fncall_dependency): Add elemental check flag.
Update call to gfc_check_argument_dependency.
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_call): Make call to
gfc_conv_elemental_dependency unconditional, but with a flag
whether we should check dependencies between variables.
(gfc_conv_elemental_dependency): Add elemental check flag.
Update call to gfc_check_fncall_dependency.
* trans-expr.c (gfc_trans_arrayfunc_assign): Update call to
gfc_check_fncall_dependency.
* resolve.c (find_noncopying_intrinsics): Update call to
gfc_check_fncall_dependency.
* dependency.h (enum gfc_dep_check): New enum.
(gfc_check_fncall_dependency): Update prototype.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-14 10:56 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-14 11:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-14 11:18 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-14 11:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:10 -------
The crucial difference between 142153 and 142154 seems to be that the former
uses table->realdata.data directly, while the latter creates a "atmp"
descriptor, which does not fill .dim[1].stride:
table->realdata.dim[0].stride = 1;
table->realdata.dim[1].stride = 1;
and then:
D.947 = NON_LVALUE_EXPR <table->realdata.dim[1].stride> + D.936;
vs.
atmp.1.dim[0].stride = 1;
/* but not setting atmp.1.dim[1].{stride,lbound,ubound} */
D.959 = NON_LVALUE_EXPR <atmp.1.dim[1].stride> + D.957;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-14 11:10 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-14 11:18 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-14 12:04 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
` (13 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-14 11:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:18 -------
The problem seems to be that for the tmp array, one has a RANK 1 array:
"realdata(:,1)"
thus gfc_trans_create_temp_array only gets info->dimen == 1 and thus it only
fills the data for rank 1. However, the stride for rank 2 is later used (in
this case unnecessarily as (:,1) is contiguous.) I do not see ad hoc how this
can be solved.
Paul, do you have an idea? (BTW: 4.4.3 is supposed to get its RC tomorrow thus
it will be rather a 4.4.4/4.5 item, unless we are really fast.)
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-14 11:18 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-14 12:04 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-01-14 16:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com @ 2010-01-14 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1620 bytes --]
------- Comment #7 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 12:04 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with
allocatable compounds
Dear Tobias,
I am just leaving on a trip. As it happens, I copied this PR onto my
memory stick, so I will have a look at the airport. I will let you
know my thoughts from my telephone.
Cheers
Paul
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:18 PM, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:18 -------
> The problem seems to be that for the tmp array, one has a RANK 1 array:
> "realdata(:,1)"
> thus gfc_trans_create_temp_array only gets info->dimen == 1 and thus it only
> fills the data for rank 1. However, the stride for rank 2 is later used (in
> this case unnecessarily as (:,1) is contiguous.) I do not see ad hoc how this
> can be solved.
>
> Paul, do you have an idea? (BTW: 4.4.3 is supposed to get its RC tomorrow thus
> it will be rather a 4.4.4/4.5 item, unless we are really fast.)
>
>
> --
>
> burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CC| |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-14 12:04 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
@ 2010-01-14 16:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-18 9:54 ` [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-14 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-14 16:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-18 9:54 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-18 17:32 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-18 9:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-18 09:54 -------
This PR has me somewhat flummoxed. I have changed the title to reflect the
fact that it does not matter if the component is allocatable or a pointer.
Also, a component reference of an allocatable array of derived types works
correctly.
There is no reason whatsoever why a temporary is generated; I just cannot see
who is making that happen.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] |[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression]
|Wrong-code with allocatable |Wrong-code with allocatable
|compounds |or pointer components in
| |elemental functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-18 9:54 ` [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-18 17:32 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-21 13:16 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-18 17:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-18 17:32 -------
Have posted a fix on the list today.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-01-18 17:32:21
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-18 17:32 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-21 13:16 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-21 16:21 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-21 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|4.4.3 |4.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-21 13:16 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-21 16:21 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-21 20:25 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-21 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 16:20 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> Have posted a fix on the list today.
Latest patch by Paul (which has been approved):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-01/msg00134.html
I have filled PR 42831 regarding the missed optimization of using an
unnecessary array temporary.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-21 16:21 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-21 20:25 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-01-21 20:39 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com @ 2010-01-21 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1212 bytes --]
------- Comment #11 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com 2010-01-21 20:25 -------
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with
allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
Thanks, Tobias.
I am not sure that it is unnecessary - for that reason, I am glad to
have found an alternative fix to this PR. Fortunately, it is right on
the apex of a seriously small corner case :-)
Paul
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:20 PM, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
<gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 16:20 -------
> (In reply to comment #9)
>> Have posted a fix on the list today.
>
> Latest patch by Paul (which has been approved):
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-01/msg00134.html
>
> I have filled PR 42831 regarding the missed optimization of using an
> unnecessary array temporary.
>
>
> --
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
> You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-21 20:25 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
@ 2010-01-21 20:39 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-21 20:45 ` [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4 " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-21 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 20:39 -------
Subject: Bug 42736
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jan 21 20:38:51 2010
New Revision: 156161
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156161
Log:
2010-01-21 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42736
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_conv_elemental_dependencies): If temporary
is required, turn any trailing array elements after a range
into ranges so that offsets can be calculated.
2010-01-21 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42736
* gfortran.dg/dependency_25.f90 : New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dependency_25.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-21 20:39 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-21 20:45 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-27 20:06 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-21 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 20:45 -------
Fixed on trunk.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail|4.3.4 4.4.2 4.5.0 |4.3.4 4.4.2
Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] |[4.3/4.4 Regression] Wrong-
|Wrong-code with allocatable |code with allocatable or
|or pointer components in |pointer components in
|elemental functions |elemental functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-21 20:45 ` [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3/4.4 " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-27 20:06 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-27 20:07 ` [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3 " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-27 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-27 20:06 -------
Subject: Bug 42736
Author: pault
Date: Wed Jan 27 20:06:08 2010
New Revision: 156302
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156302
Log:
2010-01-27 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42736
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_conv_elemental_dependencies): If temporary
is required, turn any trailing array elements after a range
into ranges so that offsets can be calculated.
2010-01-27 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42736
* gfortran.dg/dependency_25.f90 : New test.
Added:
branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dependency_25.f90
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-27 20:06 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-27 20:07 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-28 20:35 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-27 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-27 20:07 -------
2 down, 1 to go.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|[4.3/4.4 Regression] Wrong- |[4.3 Regression] Wrong-code
|code with allocatable or |with allocatable or pointer
|pointer components in |components in elemental
|elemental functions |functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-27 20:07 ` [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3 " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-28 20:35 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-05-09 21:51 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-05-09 21:51 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-01-28 20:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-28 20:35 -------
trunk and 4.4 have diverged too far from 4.3 to fix this one simply. The patch
applied cleanly but the problem was not fixed. Copying over the entirity of
gfc_conv_elemental_dependencies, with mods for other function calls that have
changed, compiled but caused huge numbers of regressions.
I am afraid this one is not worth further effort.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2010-01-28 20:35 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-05-09 21:51 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-05-09 21:51 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-05-09 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #18 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-09 21:51 -------
(In reply to comment #17)
> Reopen and closing as fixed. References to this PR are confusing if it shows up
> as WONTFIX.
And closing again.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/42736] [4.3 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable or pointer components in elemental functions
2010-01-13 21:19 [Bug fortran/42736] New: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with allocatable compounds burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2010-05-09 21:51 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-05-09 21:51 ` dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-05-09 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #17 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-09 21:51 -------
Reopen and closing as fixed. References to this PR are confusing if it shows up
as WONTFIX.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|WONTFIX |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42736
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread