public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/43390] New: logical_dot_product.f90: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:27:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-43390-13404@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) Ken Werner reported for spu-unknown-elf: "I'm getting the following message: "error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF". It looks like this could be a problem of the frontend. Please find attached the complete output and let me know if you need further infos." $ /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran2/../../gfortran -B/home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran2/../../ /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -pedantic-errors -Wl,--gc-sections -B/home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-build/spu/./libgfortran/.libs -L/home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-build/spu/./libgfortran/.libs -L/home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-build/spu/./libiberty -Wl,--auto-overlay -Wl,--reserved-space=131072 -lm -o ./logical_dot_product.exe /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90: In function 'main': /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 0> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.53_106 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 0>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 32> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.53_107 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 32>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 64> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.53_109 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 64>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 96> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.53_111 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.52_105, 32, 96>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 0> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.32_74 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 0>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 32> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.32_75 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 32>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 64> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.32_77 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 64>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 96> f951: note: in statement stmp_var_.32_79 = BIT_FIELD_REF <vect_var_.31_73, 32, 96>; /home/kwerner/dailybuild/spu-tc-2010-03-01/gcc-head/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/logical_dot_product.f90:11:0: internal compiler error: verify_stmts failed Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. -- Summary: logical_dot_product.f90: error: integral result type precision does not match field size of BIT_FIELD_REF Product: gcc Version: 4.5.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC target triplet: spu-unknown-elf http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43390
next reply other threads:[~2010-03-16 13:27 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2010-03-16 13:27 burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message] 2010-03-16 13:35 ` [Bug fortran/43390] " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-16 13:39 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-16 13:56 ` [Bug middle-end/43390] [4.5 Regression] ICE: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-16 14:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-16 14:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-20 15:20 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-22 12:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-22 12:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-25 16:41 ` hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-43390-13404@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).