[Bug fortran/109865] New: different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Bug fortran/109865] New: different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

            Bug ID: 109865
           Summary: different results when routine moved inside the
                    contains statement
           Product: gcc
           Version: og12 (devel/omp/gcc-12)
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: Gary.White at ColoState dot edu
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 55087
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55087&action=edit
set of subroutines where moving mc11ad inside the contains statement produces
incorrect results

In the following code, when the subroutine mc11ad is moved inside the contains
statement, incorrect results are produced.  Works fine outside the contains
statement as provided here.  This subroutine is only called from the main
subroutine va09ad, nowhere else.  Other clues are that if I put this routine
inside a module, incorrect results are produced.  This set of routines is used
in a much larger code, so I'm not able to isolate the problem down to a simple
example.  

I have verified that this is a gfortran bug because the code produces correct
results with the Intel compiler with mc11ad inside or outside the contains
statement.

gfortran compiler I'm using:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gfortran
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/12/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none:amdgcn-amdhsa
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu
12.1.0-2ubuntu1~22.04' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-12/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++,go,d,fortran,objc,obj-c++,m2 --prefix=/usr
--with-gcc-major-version-only --program-suffix=-12
--program-prefix=x86_64-linux-gnu- --enable-shared --enable-linker-build-id
--libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix
--libdir=/usr/lib --enable-nls --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-libstdcxx-debug
--enable-libstdcxx-time=yes --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=new
--enable-gnu-unique-object --disable-vtable-verify --enable-plugin
--enable-default-pie --with-system-zlib --enable-libphobos-checking=release
--with-target-system-zlib=auto --enable-objc-gc=auto --enable-multiarch
--disable-werror --enable-cet --with-arch-32=i686 --with-abi=m64
--with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32 --enable-multilib --with-tune=generic
--enable-offload-targets=nvptx-none=/build/gcc-12-sZcx2y/gcc-12-12.1.0/debian/tmp-nvptx/usr,amdgcn-amdhsa=/build/gcc-12-sZcx2y/gcc-12-12.1.0/debian/tmp-gcn/usr
--enable-offload-defaulted --without-cuda-driver --enable-checking=release
--build=x86_64-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.1.0 (Ubuntu 12.1.0-2ubuntu1~22.04)

Options being used to compile the code:
        COPTIONS = -cpp -std=f2018 -c -D ieee -D dbleprecision -m64
-fsignaling-nans -ffpe-summary='invalid','zero','overflow','underflow' -O3
-funroll-loops -ffast-math 


      subroutine
va09ad(functn,n,x,f,g,h,w,dfn,eps2,mode,maxfn,iprint,iexit,itn,parm,beta,design)
         use status_module, only : int32, wp, sysout, syscrn, nlogit,
ncovs_nlbetas, ncovs, &
            zero, one, two, modnam, num_to_str, outtext
         implicit none
         integer(kind=int32), intent(in) :: n, mode, maxfn, iprint
         integer(kind=int32), intent(out) :: iexit, itn
         real(kind=wp), intent(in) :: dfn, eps2(n)
         real(kind=wp), intent(out) ::  x(n),g(n),h(n*(n+1)/2),w(n*3), f
         real(kind=wp), intent(out) :: parm(nlogit), beta(ncovs_nlbetas),
design(nlogit,ncovs)
         external functn
         integer(kind=int32) ig, igg, is, ir, mk, ij, i, ifn, icon
         real(kind=wp)   alphalocal, z, gs, gys, df, gs0, tot, fy, zz, dgs,
sigma, epsln
         character(len=:), allocatable :: frmt

         interface 
            subroutine functn(nparm, xbeta, xloglk, g, parm, beta, design)
               use status_module  
               use data_module
               implicit none
               integer(kind=int32), intent(in) :: nparm
               real(kind=wp), intent(in out) :: xbeta(nparm), g(nparm),
parm(nlogit), beta(ncovs_nlbetas), design(nlogit,ncovs)   
               real(kind=wp), intent(out) :: xloglk
            end subroutine functn
         end interface

         ! This interface causes problems with prcisub.f90, 
         ! just as does including mc11ad inside the contains statement.
         !interface
         !   subroutine mc11ad(a,n,z,sigma,w,ir,mk,eps2)
         !      use status_module, only : wp, int32, zero, one
         !      implicit none
         !      integer(kind=int32), intent(in)  :: n, mk
         !      integer(kind=int32), intent(out) :: ir
         !      real(kind=wp), intent(in out) :: a(n*(n+1)/2),z(n),w(n*3)
         !      real(kind=wp), intent(in) :: eps2
         !      real(kind=wp), intent(in out) :: sigma
         !   end subroutine mc11ad
         !end interface

         if(iprint/=0) then
             write(unit=sysout,fmt='(''  ENTERING MINIMIZATION''/)')
         end if

         ig=n
         igg=n+n
         is=igg
         iexit=0
         ir=n
         if(mode==1) then
            ! Initialize h matrix
            h=zero
            ij=(n*(n+1)/2)+1
            do i=1,n
               ij=ij-i
               h(ij)=one
            end do
         else if(mode==2) then
            call mc11bd(h,n,ir)
            if(ir<n)return
         end if
         f=zero
         z=f
         itn=0
         call functn(n,x,f,g,parm,beta,design)
         ifn=1
         df=dfn
         if(dfn==zero)df=f-z
         if(dfn<zero) df=abs(df*f)
         if(df<=zero)df=one
      20 continue
         if(iprint==0) goto 21
         if(mod(itn,iprint)/=0)goto 21
         write(unit=sysout,fmt='(24I5)')itn,ifn,maxfn,iexit
         write(unit=syscrn,fmt='(24I5)')itn,ifn,maxfn,iexit
         write(unit=sysout,fmt='(1X,''Current Function Value = '',G15.7)') f
         write(unit=syscrn,fmt='(1X,''Current Function Value = '',G15.7)') f
         if(iprint<0) goto 21
         write(unit=sysout,fmt='(1X,''Current Parameter Values:'')')
         write(unit=sysout,fmt='(5G15.7)') (x(i),i=1,n)
         write(unit=syscrn,fmt='(1X,''Current Parameter Values:'')')
         write(unit=syscrn,fmt='(5G15.7)') (x(i),i=1,n)
         write(unit=sysout,fmt='(1X,''Current Gradient:'')')
         write(unit=sysout,fmt='(5G15.7)') (g(i),i=1,n)
         write(unit=syscrn,fmt='(1X,''Current Gradient:'')')
         write(unit=syscrn,fmt='(5G15.7)') (g(i),i=1,n)
         flush(unit=sysout)
     21  frmt=modnam(1:min(len(modnam),64))//' Iteration '//num_to_str(itn)
         call outtext(frmt)
         itn=itn+1
         w(ig+1:ig+n)=g(1:n)
         call mc11ed(h,n,g,w,ir)
         w(is+1:is+n)=-g(1:n)
         gs=sum(-g(1:n)*w(ig+1:ig+n))
         iexit=2
         if(gs >= zero) goto 92
         gs0=gs
         alphalocal=-two*df/gs
         if(alphalocal>one)alphalocal=one
         df=f
         tot=zero
      30 continue
         iexit=3
         if(ifn == maxfn) goto 92
         icon=0
         iexit=1
         do i=1,n
            z=alphalocal*w(is+i)
            if(abs(z) >= eps2(i)) icon=1
            x(i)=x(i)+z
         end do
         call functn(n,x,fy,g,parm,beta,design)
         ifn=ifn+1
         gys=sum(g(1:n)*w(is+1:is+n))
         if(fy >= f) goto 40
         if(abs(gys/gs0) <= 0.9_wp) goto 50
         if(gys > zero) goto 40
         tot=tot+alphalocal
         z=10._wp
         if(gs < gys) z=gys/(gs-gys)
         if(z > 10._wp) z=10._wp
         alphalocal=alphalocal*z
         f=fy
         gs=gys
         goto 30
      40 continue
         x(1:n)=x(1:n)-alphalocal*w(is+1:is+n)
         if(icon == 0) goto 92
         z=3._wp*(f-fy)/alphalocal+gys+gs
         zz=sqrt(max(zero,z**2-gs*gys))
         z=one-(gys+zz-z)/(two*zz+gys-gs)
         alphalocal=alphalocal*z
         goto 30
      50 continue
         alphalocal=tot+alphalocal
         f=fy
         if(icon == 0) goto 90
         df=df-f
         dgs=gys-gs0
         w(igg+1:igg+n)=g(1:n)
         g(1:n)=-w(ig+1:ig+n)
         if(dgs+alphalocal*gs0<=zero) then
            ! Complementary dfp formula
            sigma=one/gs0
            ir=-ir
            mk=1
            epsln=zero
            call mc11ad(h,n,g,sigma,w,ir,mk,epsln)
            g(1:n)=w(igg+1:igg+n)-w(ig+1:ig+n)
            sigma=one/(alphalocal*dgs)
            ir=-ir
            mk=0
            epsln=zero
            call mc11ad(h,n,g,sigma,w,ir,mk,epsln)
         else
            ! dfp formula
            zz=alphalocal/(dgs-alphalocal*gs0)
            sigma=-zz
            mk=1
            epsln=epsilon(sigma)   ! Was 1.d-16
            call mc11ad(h,n,g,sigma,w,ir,mk,epsln)
            z=dgs*zz-one
            g(1:n)=w(igg+1:igg+n)+z*w(ig+1:ig+n)
            sigma=one/(zz*dgs**2)
            mk=0
            epsln=zero
            call mc11ad(h,n,g,sigma,w,ir,mk,epsln)
         end if
         g(1:n)=w(igg+1:igg+n)
         goto 20
      92 continue
         g(1:n)=w(ig+1:ig+n)
      90 continue
         if(iprint/=0) then
            write(unit=sysout,fmt='(24I5)')itn,ifn,iexit
            write(unit=sysout,fmt='(1X,''Current Function Value = '',G15.7)') f
            write(unit=sysout,fmt='(1X,''Current Parameter Values:'')')
            write(unit=sysout,fmt='(5G15.7)') x(1:n)
            write(unit=sysout,fmt='(1X,''Current Gradient:'')')
            write(unit=sysout,fmt='(5G15.7)') g(1:n)
         flush(unit=sysout)
         end if

      contains

        
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------
         !  Multiply a vector by the inverse of the factors given in a
         subroutine mc11ed(a,n,z,w,ir)
            use status_module, only : wp, int32
            implicit none
            integer(kind=int32), intent(in)  :: n
            integer(kind=int32), intent(in) :: ir
            real(kind=wp)    a(n*(n+1)/2),z(n),w(n*3)
            real(kind=wp)    v
            integer(kind=int32) j, ij, ii, nip, i
            if(ir < n) return
            w(1)=z(1)
            if(n<= 1) then
               z(1)=z(1)/a(1)
               return
            end if
            do i=2,n
               ij=i
               v=z(i)
               do j=1,i-1
                  v=v-a(ij)*z(j)
                  ij=ij+n-j
               end do
               w(i)=v
               z(i)=v
            end do
            z(n)=z(n)/a(ij)
            do nip=2,n
               i=n+1-nip
               ii=ij-nip
               v=z(i)/a(ii)
               ij=ii
               do j=i+1,n
                  ii=ii+1
                  v=v-a(ii)*z(j)
               end do
               z(i)=v
            end do
         end subroutine mc11ed

        
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------
         !   Factorize a matrix given in a
         subroutine mc11bd(a,n,ir)
            use status_module, only : wp, int32, zero
            implicit none
            integer(kind=int32), intent(in)  :: n
            integer(kind=int32), intent(out) :: ir
            real(kind=wp), intent(out)   :: a(n*(n+1)/2)
            real(kind=wp) aa, v
            integer(kind=int32) ii, i, jk, ij, ni, ip, ik
            ir=n
            if(n <= 1) then
            if(a(1) > zero)return
               a(1)=zero
               ir=0
            else
               ii=1
               do i=2,n
                  aa=a(ii)
                  ni=n+1+ii-i
                  if(aa > zero)then
                     ip=ii+1
                     ii=ni+1
                     jk=ii
                     do ij=ip,ni
                        v=a(ij)/aa
                        do ik=ij,ni
                           a(jk)=a(jk)-a(ik)*v
                           jk=jk+1
                        end do
                        a(ij)=v
                     end do
                  else
                     a(ii)=zero
                     ir=ir-1
                     ii=ni+1
                  end if
               end do
               if(a(ii) <= zero) then
                  a(ii)=zero
                  ir=ir-1
               end if
            end if
         end subroutine mc11bd

      end subroutine va09ad

      !-----------------------------------------------------------------------
      subroutine mc11ad(a,n,z,sigma,w,ir,mk,eps2)
         use status_module, only : wp, int32, zero, one
         implicit none
         integer(kind=int32), intent(in)  :: n, mk
         integer(kind=int32), intent(out) :: ir
         real(kind=wp), intent(in out) :: a(n*(n+1)/2),z(n),w(n*3)
         real(kind=wp), intent(in) :: eps2
         real(kind=wp), intent(in out) :: sigma
         real(kind=wp) ti, v, tim, al, r, b, gm, y
         integer(kind=int32) np, ij, i, j, ip, mm

         ! Update factors given in a by sigma*z*zt
         ti=zero; v=zero; tim=zero; al=zero; r=zero; b=zero; gm=zero; y=zero;
         np=0; ij=0; i=0; j=0; ip=0; mm=0;
         if(n <= 1) then
            a(1)=a(1)+sigma*z(1)**2
            ir=1
            if(a(1) > zero) return
            a(1)=zero
            ir=0
            return
         end if
         np=n+1
         if(sigma > zero)goto 40
         if(sigma == zero .or. ir == 0)return
         ti=one/sigma
         ij=1
         if(mk /= 0) then
            do i=1,n
               if(a(ij) /= zero) ti=ti+w(i)**2/a(ij)
               ij=ij+np-i
            end do
         else
            w(1:n)=z(1:n)
            do i=1,n
               ip=i+1
               v=w(i)
               if(a(ij) <= zero) then
                  w(i)=zero
                  ij=ij+np-i
                  cycle
               end if
               ti=ti+v**2/a(ij)
               if(i /= n) then
                  do j=ip,n
                     ij=ij+1
                     w(j)=w(j)+v*a(ij)
                  end do
               end if
               ij=ij+1
            end do
         end if
         if(ir <= 0) goto 21
         if(ti > zero) goto 22
         if(mk-1 <= 0) then
            goto 40
         else
            goto 23
         end if
      21 ti=zero
         ir=-ir-1
         goto 23
      22 ti=eps2/sigma
         if(eps2 == zero) ir=ir-1
      23 continue
         mm=1
         tim=ti
         do i=1,n
            j=np-i
            ij=ij-i
            if(a(ij) /= zero) tim=ti-w(j)**2/a(ij)
            w(j)=ti
            ti=tim
         end do
         goto 41
      40 continue
         mm=0
         tim=one/sigma
      41 continue
         ij=1
         do i=1,n
            ip=i+1
            v=z(i)
            if(a(ij) <= zero) then
               if(ir > 0 .or. sigma < zero .or. v == zero) then
                  ti=tim
                  ij=ij+np-i
                  cycle
               else
                  ir=1-ir
                  a(ij)=v**2/tim
                  if(i == n) return
                  do j=ip,n
                     ij=ij+1
                     a(ij)=z(j)/v
                  end do
                  return
               end if
               ti=tim
               ij=ij+np-i
               cycle
            end if
            al=v/a(ij)
            if(mm <= 0) then
               ti=tim+v*al
            else
               ti=w(i)
            end if
            r=ti/tim
            a(ij)=a(ij)*r
            if(r == zero) exit
            if(i == n) exit
            b=al/ti
            if(r > 4._wp) then
               gm=tim/ti
               do j=ip,n
                  ij=ij+1
                  y=a(ij)
                  a(ij)=b*z(j)+y*gm
                  z(j)=z(j)-v*y
               end do
            else
               do j=ip,n
                  ij=ij+1
                  z(j)=z(j)-v*a(ij)
                  a(ij)=a(ij)+b*z(j)
               end do
            end if
            tim=ti
            ij=ij+1
         end do
         if(ir < 0) ir=-ir
      end subroutine mc11ad

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2023-05-15
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Please provide a compilable, self-contained testcase.  I get:

varmat.F90:3:11:

    3 |       use status_module
      |           1
Fatal Error: Cannot open module file 'status_module.mod' for reading at (1): No
such file or directory
compilation terminated.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[kargl at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #0)
> Created attachment 55087 [details]
> set of subroutines where moving mc11ad inside the contains statement
> produces incorrect results
> 
> In the following code, when the subroutine mc11ad is moved inside the
> contains statement, incorrect results are produced.

Produce wrong results is meaningless as you haven't told what the
correct results and wrong results are.  A difference in the 7
decimal place for REAL may be entirely possible due to floating
point round-off

> Options being used to compile the code:
> 	COPTIONS = -cpp -std=f2018 -c -D ieee -D dbleprecision -m64
> -fsignaling-nans -ffpe-summary='invalid','zero','overflow','underflow' -O3
> -funroll-loops -ffast-math 

What happens if you remove -ffast-math and use -O0 or -O1?

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #3 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> (In reply to GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #0)
> > Created attachment 55087 [details]
> > set of subroutines where moving mc11ad inside the contains statement
> > produces incorrect results
> > 
> > In the following code, when the subroutine mc11ad is moved inside the
> > contains statement, incorrect results are produced.
> 
> Produce wrong results is meaningless as you haven't told what the
> correct results and wrong results are.  A difference in the 7
> decimal place for REAL may be entirely possible due to floating
> point round-off
> 
> > Options being used to compile the code:
> > 	COPTIONS = -cpp -std=f2018 -c -D ieee -D dbleprecision -m64
> > -fsignaling-nans -ffpe-summary='invalid','zero','overflow','underflow' -O3
> > -funroll-loops -ffast-math 
> 
> What happens if you remove -ffast-math and use -O0 or -O1?

-O0 generates correct code with or without -ffastmath, -O1 does not generate
correct code.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 07:11:17PM +0000, Gary.White at ColoState dot edu
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865
> (In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> > (In reply to GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #0)
> > 
> > > Options being used to compile the code:
> > > 	COPTIONS = -cpp -std=f2018 -c -D ieee -D dbleprecision -m64
> > > -fsignaling-nans -ffpe-summary='invalid','zero','overflow','underflow' -O3
> > > -funroll-loops -ffast-math 
> > 
> > What happens if you remove -ffast-math and use -O0 or -O1?
> 
> -O0 generates correct code with or without -ffastmath, -O1 does not generate
> correct code.

I assume you've also tried with -fcheck=all.
Your report states you're using og12.  If 
it supports the sanitizer, can you add 
-fsanitize=undefined to the options?

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #5 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4)
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 07:11:17PM +0000, Gary.White at ColoState dot edu
> wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865
> > (In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> > > (In reply to GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #0)
> > > 
> > > > Options being used to compile the code:
> > > > 	COPTIONS = -cpp -std=f2018 -c -D ieee -D dbleprecision -m64
> > > > -fsignaling-nans -ffpe-summary='invalid','zero','overflow','underflow' -O3
> > > > -funroll-loops -ffast-math 
> > > 
> > > What happens if you remove -ffast-math and use -O0 or -O1?
> > 
> > -O0 generates correct code with or without -ffastmath, -O1 does not generate
> > correct code.
> 
> I assume you've also tried with -fcheck=all.
> Your report states you're using og12.  If 
> it supports the sanitizer, can you add 
> -fsanitize=undefined to the options?

-fcheck=all does not generate any warnings.
-fsanitize=undefined returns pages when loading of:

undefined reference to `__ubsan_handle_pointer_overflow'

which makes no sense to me????

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[kargl at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #5)
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4)

> > I assume you've also tried with -fcheck=all.
> > Your report states you're using og12.  If 
> > it supports the sanitizer, can you add 
> > -fsanitize=undefined to the options?
> 
> -fcheck=all does not generate any warnings.
> -fsanitize=undefined returns pages when loading of:
> 
> undefined reference to `__ubsan_handle_pointer_overflow'
> 
> which makes no sense to me????

Hmmm.  Thanks for checking.  Either your version of
gcc is not built with --enable-libsanitizer or 
gfortran cannot find the library.  At this point,
it seems we're going to need a complete testcase.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #7 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
Sorry I can't simplify this down to a nice compact piece of code, but ...

In the attached test_case.zip file are all the *.f90 files, makefile, and some
library files that work on ubuntu with gfortran-12.  I can provide Windows
libraries if that is easier.

  Create the executable file, mark64,  by a  simple
 make
or
 make type=mark64

Right now, the makefile does not have an -O0 on the va09ad.f90 compile line. 
As we found out, over-riding -O3 on va09ad.f90 compilation produces correct
code.

Execute the test case with

 ./mark64 i=dipper.inp o=dipper.out

I've included 2 output files, dipper_correct.out and dipper_incorrect.out so
you can see what correct and incorrect outputs look like.

Hopefully this all works out.

Thanks.

Gary

Gary C. White, CWB(r)
Professor Emeritus
Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology
10 Wagar
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
(515)450-2768 Mobile
Gary.White@ColoState.edu
https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/gwhite/
he/him/his

See where we are!

"Leadership is a privilege to better the lives of others. It is not an
opportunity to satisfy personal greed." Mwai Kibaki

-----Original Message-----
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 2:42 PM
To: White,Gary <Gary.White@colostate.edu>
Subject: [Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the
contains statement

** Caution: EXTERNAL Sender **

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to
GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #5)
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4)

> > I assume you've also tried with -fcheck=all.
> > Your report states you're using og12.  If it supports the sanitizer,
> > can you add -fsanitize=undefined to the options?
>
> -fcheck=all does not generate any warnings.
> -fsanitize=undefined returns pages when loading of:
>
> undefined reference to `__ubsan_handle_pointer_overflow'
>
> which makes no sense to me????

Hmmm.  Thanks for checking.  Either your version of gcc is not built with
--enable-libsanitizer or gfortran cannot find the library.  At this point, it
seems we're going to need a complete testcase.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You reported the bug.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #8 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I just tried to send you a zip file with all the code and instructions (see
below), but it is over 6Mb in size, and was rejected.  Where can I put it that
you can access it?

I have put the file test_case.zip on my Onedrive account at

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ak8uiHyJ2kc2iqIPdvZKUGDak3CZ9A?e=yFcRJZ

Gary


Gary C. White, CWB(r)
Professor Emeritus
Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology
10 Wagar
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
(515)450-2768 Mobile
Gary.White@ColoState.edu
https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/gwhite/
he/him/his

See where we are!

"Leadership is a privilege to better the lives of others. It is not an
opportunity to satisfy personal greed." Mwai Kibaki

-----Original Message-----
From: White,Gary
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 3:53 PM
To: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: [Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside
the contains statement

Sorry I can't simplify this down to a nice compact piece of code, but ...

In the attached test_case.zip file are all the *.f90 files, makefile, and some
library files that work on ubuntu with gfortran-12.  I can provide Windows
libraries if that is easier.

  Create the executable file, mark64,  by a  simple  make or  make type=mark64

Right now, the makefile does not have an -O0 on the va09ad.f90 compile line. 
As we found out, over-riding -O3 on va09ad.f90 compilation produces correct
code.

Execute the test case with

 ./mark64 i=dipper.inp o=dipper.out

I've included 2 output files, dipper_correct.out and dipper_incorrect.out so
you can see what correct and incorrect outputs look like.

Hopefully this all works out.

Thanks.

Gary

Gary C. White, CWB(r)
Professor Emeritus
Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology
10 Wagar
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
(515)450-2768 Mobile
Gary.White@ColoState.edu
https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/gwhite/
he/him/his

See where we are!

"Leadership is a privilege to better the lives of others. It is not an
opportunity to satisfy personal greed." Mwai Kibaki

-----Original Message-----
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 2:42 PM
To: White,Gary <Gary.White@colostate.edu>
Subject: [Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the
contains statement

** Caution: EXTERNAL Sender **

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to
GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #5)
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4)

> > I assume you've also tried with -fcheck=all.
> > Your report states you're using og12.  If it supports the sanitizer,
> > can you add -fsanitize=undefined to the options?
>
> -fcheck=all does not generate any warnings.
> -fsanitize=undefined returns pages when loading of:
>
> undefined reference to `__ubsan_handle_pointer_overflow'
>
> which makes no sense to me????

Hmmm.  Thanks for checking.  Either your version of gcc is not built with
--enable-libsanitizer or gfortran cannot find the library.  At this point, it
seems we're going to need a complete testcase.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You reported the bug.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #9 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
Another clue.  I'm seeing the same bug in gfortran-13, except that I have to
use  -O0 for both cases of mc11ad.f90 in or out of the contains statement.

Similarly, if I put the set of va09ad.f90 routines in a module, I have to use
-O0 to get correct answers.  -O3 causes a bug with va09ad.f90 in a module as
well.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 03:55:51PM +0000, Gary.White at ColoState dot edu
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865
> 
> --- Comment #9 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
> Another clue.  I'm seeing the same bug in gfortran-13, except that I have to
> use  -O0 for both cases of mc11ad.f90 in or out of the contains statement.
> 
> Similarly, if I put the set of va09ad.f90 routines in a module, I have to use
> -O0 to get correct answers.  -O3 causes a bug with va09ad.f90 in a module as
> well.
> 

Can you use valgrind?  I got the zip file, but reducing
that will be a pain. First, the included lapack, blas,
and linpack archives are useless to me.  Second, there
is just way too much code with a complete lack of
familiarity to try to reduce this.

I suspect you may have to go old school with
'print *' debugging in the problematic subroutine.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #11 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I've never used valgrind -- what would it do?

The problem isn't that the code is wrong -- otherwise -O0 would not generate
correct results.  The compiler is optimizing something incorrectly with -O1
that causes the numerical optimizer, i.e., va09ad code, to not work correctly. 
I included 2 files in the zip file that show incorrect and correct results --
basically va09ad just doesn't go anywhere, not finding an optimum after running
to the maximum number of function calls.  It's not blowing up or aborting --
just producing wrong answers.

I am willing to walk you through where the critical code is located, but need
to know more of what system you're working on and how I can help.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #12 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I just checked, and the bug occurs with the LAPACK routines instead of LinPack.
 So "make type=markLAPACK" will generate markLAPACK that will fail with -O3,
but work with -O0.

--- Comment #13 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I just checked, and the bug occurs with the LAPACK routines instead of LinPack.
 So "make type=markLAPACK" will generate markLAPACK that will fail with -O3,
but work with -O0.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #12 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I just checked, and the bug occurs with the LAPACK routines instead of LinPack.
 So "make type=markLAPACK" will generate markLAPACK that will fail with -O3,
but work with -O0.

--- Comment #13 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I just checked, and the bug occurs with the LAPACK routines instead of LinPack.
 So "make type=markLAPACK" will generate markLAPACK that will fail with -O3,
but work with -O0.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

--- Comment #14 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
Clarification on the last post.  I'm compiling everything with -O3, except
va09ad.f90.  If va09ad.f90 is compiled with -O3, you get the bug.  If
va09ad.f90 is compiled with -O0, the code produces correct answers. 

Since LAPACK is a common library, you should be able to duplicate the bug with
little difficulty by changing the makefile.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to GARY.WHITE@ColoState.edu from comment #11)
> I've never used valgrind -- what would it do?
> 
 valgrind tracks and checks memory allocations during execution and can spot
where things, such as pointers that go astray.  This sometimes happens with
optimization bugs.

From the man page. It has many tools and is very useful.

       Valgrind is a flexible program for debugging and profiling Linux
       executables. It consists of a core, which provides a synthetic CPU in
       software, and a series of debugging and profiling tools. The
       architecture is modular, so that new tools can be created easily and
       without disturbing the existing structure.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[Gary.White at ColoState dot edu]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED

--- Comment #16 from GARY.WHITE at ColoState dot edu <Gary.White at ColoState dot edu> ---
I resolved the issue.  The parameter ir was declared intent(out) in subroutine
mc11ad, but there was a check in an if statement to see if ir == 0, meaning ir
was defined on input.  This check followed code that set ir when n == 1, and
this was never executed when the code did not produce correct answers.  Anyway,
changing intent(out) to intent(in out) resolved the -O3 optimization issue and
the code works as expected.

I guess its too much to expect that the compiler would detect that a parameter
was actually being access before being set if the parameter is declared
intent(out) only.

[Bug fortran/109865] different results when routine moved inside the contains statement

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|FIXED                       |INVALID

--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Since there is no GCC bug changing the issue status to invalid.