From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2042 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2012 22:19:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 1995 invoked by uid 48); 3 Dec 2012 22:19:28 -0000 From: "janus at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/55548] SYSTEM_CLOCK with integer(8) provides nanosecond resolution, but only microsecond precision (without -lrt) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 22:19:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: janus at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: janus at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-12/txt/msg00297.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55548 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-03 22:19:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > However, the precision claimed by the COUNT_RATE argument should better match > the actual precision (also with default flags!). > > > Possible solutions: > 1) Use a nanosecond COUNT_RATE only when -lrt is given, and microsecond > otherwise. This has been implemented in r194105. Leftover to-do item: > Using SYSTEM_CLOCK with integer(16) arguments currently results in: > sysclock.f90:(.text+0x455): undefined reference to `_gfortran_system_clock_16' ... add an integer(16) version of SYSTEM_CLOCK!