public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results @ 2010-10-25 17:44 sjbespa at comcast dot net 2010-10-25 18:45 ` [Bug fortran/46166] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ` (4 more replies) 0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: sjbespa at comcast dot net @ 2010-10-25 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166 Summary: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: sjbespa@comcast.net Created attachment 22147 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22147 example program described in bug report On Mac OS X 10.6.4, with gfortran from recent sources on the 4.6 trunk: et:new.single.v2 sjbespa$ /volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/gfortran -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/gfortran COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/Volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin10/4.6.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-apple-darwin10 Configured with: ../gfortran-4.6-src/configure --prefix=/volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk --enable-languages=fortran --host=x86_64-apple-darwin10 --build=x86_64-apple-darwin10 --target=x86_64-apple-darwin10 Thread model: posix gcc version 4.6.0 20101013 (experimental) (GCC) the following bug(s) have been observed: (1) if the attached file is compiled as follows sjbespa$ /volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/gfortran -O0 driver.f90 sjbespa$ ./a.out and run, the program executes correctly. The output is shown in example 1. (2) if the optimization level is changed to -O1 or higher: sjbespa$ /volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/gfortran -O1 driver.f90 sjbespa$ ./a.out the program doesn't run correctly as shown in example 2. It appears that the variables fcurr and flast have invalid values. (3) finally, if the if statement beginning at statement 251 is commented out, the example program fails in the same manner as in (2) independent of the optimization level. **** example 1 **** sjbespa$ /volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/gfortran -O0 driver.f90 sjbespa$ ./a.out input data for constitutive model solver rhosat = 40743665431535.492 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rho 1000000.0000000000 plStrainInv 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvLast 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvRate 0.0000000000000000 dlamba 0.0000000000000000 fcurr -9999999.9999000002 flast -9999999.9999000002 215.99849824095310 0.0000000000000000 6.95322298958717986E-310 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rho 1000000.0000000000 plStrainInv 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvLast 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvRate 0.0000000000000000 dlamba 0.0000000000000000 fcurr -9999999.9999000002 flast -9999999.9999000002 863.99399296381239 0.0000000000000000 6.95322298958717986E-310 **** example 2 ***** sjbespa$ /volumes/dev/gfortran-4.6-trunk/bin/gfortran -O1 driver.f90 sjbespa$ ./a.out input data for constitutive model solver rhosat = 40743665431535.492 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rho 1000000.0000000000 plStrainInv 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvLast 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvRate 0.0000000000000000 dlamba 0.0000000000000000 fcurr -9999999.9999000002 flast -9999999.9999000002 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rho 1005087.5000000000 plStrainInv 9.99999999999999955E-007 plStrainInvLast 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvRate 9.99999999999999955E-007 dlamba 9.99999999999999955E-007 fcurr NaN flast NaN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rho NaN plStrainInv NaN plStrainInvLast 0.0000000000000000 plStrainInvRate NaN dlamba NaN fcurr NaN flast NaN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/46166] optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results 2010-10-25 17:44 [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results sjbespa at comcast dot net @ 2010-10-25 18:45 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-10-25 18:51 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2010-10-25 18:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166 --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2010-10-25 18:45:18 UTC --- 1) Remove the Tabs from your source. (2) Compile with -O2 -Wall -Wuninitialized -fcheck=all. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/46166] optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results 2010-10-25 17:44 [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results sjbespa at comcast dot net 2010-10-25 18:45 ` [Bug fortran/46166] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2010-10-25 18:51 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26 15:01 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-10-25 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166 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 2010-10-25 18:50:56 UTC --- Have you thought about using -Wall and fixing the issue with tauc? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/46166] optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results 2010-10-25 17:44 [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results sjbespa at comcast dot net 2010-10-25 18:45 ` [Bug fortran/46166] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-10-25 18:51 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-10-26 15:01 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26 15:09 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu 2010-10-26 15:13 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: janus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-10-26 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26 15:00:51 UTC --- I think it would be helpful if you could reduce your test case (which is a total mess right now) to something more reasonable. Otherwise it's very hard to decide whether it is a compiler problem or a user problem and to pin down where the differences at -O0/-O1 come from. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/46166] optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results 2010-10-25 17:44 [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results sjbespa at comcast dot net ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2010-10-26 15:01 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-10-26 15:09 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu 2010-10-26 15:13 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu @ 2010-10-26 15:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> 2010-10-26 15:09:37 UTC --- Janus, See comment #2. The problem is tauc is used before it is initialized. This is a bogus bug report. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/46166] optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results 2010-10-25 17:44 [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results sjbespa at comcast dot net ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2010-10-26 15:09 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu @ 2010-10-26 15:13 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: janus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2010-10-26 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46166 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26 15:13:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > The problem is tauc is used > before it is initialized. This is a bogus > bug report. Why don't we just close it then? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-10-26 15:13 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2010-10-25 17:44 [Bug fortran/46166] New: optimization and/or removing an if(.false.) statement leads to bad results sjbespa at comcast dot net 2010-10-25 18:45 ` [Bug fortran/46166] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-10-25 18:51 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26 15:01 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-26 15:09 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu 2010-10-26 15:13 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org
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).