* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
@ 2015-09-10 21:11 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-10 21:27 ` pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-10 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
--- Comment #1 from Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Thanks Andreas for reporting this. Could you please compile and run the
following Fortran source, and paste the output here? It's been a long time
since I have used a ppc machine (and it was a darwin one, so maybe different
support).
$ cat z.f90
use iso_fortran_env
use ieee_arithmetic
integer, parameter :: maxreal = real_kinds(size(real_kinds))
print *, real_kinds
print *, maxval(real_kinds), maxreal
print *, range(0._maxreal)
print *, selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal))
print *, ieee_selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal))
print *, selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal)+1)
print *, ieee_selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal)+1)
end
$ ./bin/gfortran z.f90 && ./a.out
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
2015-09-10 21:11 ` [Bug fortran/67509] " fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-09-10 21:27 ` pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-10 21:39 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-10 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
--- Comment #2 from Pat Haugen <pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #1)
> Thanks Andreas for reporting this. Could you please compile and run the
> following Fortran source, and paste the output here? It's been a long time
> since I have used a ppc machine (and it was a darwin one, so maybe different
> support).
>
> $ cat z.f90
> use iso_fortran_env
> use ieee_arithmetic
> integer, parameter :: maxreal = real_kinds(size(real_kinds))
> print *, real_kinds
> print *, maxval(real_kinds), maxreal
> print *, range(0._maxreal)
> print *, selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal))
> print *, ieee_selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal))
> print *, selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal)+1)
> print *, ieee_selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal)+1)
> end
> $ ./bin/gfortran z.f90 && ./a.out
I see the same thing on both powerpc64/powerpc64le:
pthaugen@genoa:~$ ~/install/gcc/trunk/bin/gfortran z.f90 && ./a.out
4 8 16
16 16
291
8
8
8
8
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
2015-09-10 21:11 ` [Bug fortran/67509] " fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-10 21:27 ` pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-09-10 21:39 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-10 21:57 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-10 21:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
--- Comment #3 from Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #2)
> I see the same thing on both powerpc64/powerpc64le:
>
> pthaugen@genoa:~$ ~/install/gcc/trunk/bin/gfortran z.f90 && ./a.out
> 4 8 16
> 16 16
> 291
> 8
> 8
> 8
> 8
That's weird, because it would mean that the "decimal exponent range" (i.e. the
largest possible power of ten) is 291, which is smaller than the range of 307
for a regular double. I know that ppc long double is the non-IEEE "double
double" format, but this should give it the same range as double.
Can you tell me what this outputs?
print *, range(0._4), range(0._8), range(0._16)
print *, huge(0._4), huge(0._8), huge(0._16)
print *, tiny(0._4), tiny(0._8), tiny(0._16)
end
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-10 21:39 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-09-10 21:57 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
2015-09-10 22:11 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: schwab@linux-m68k.org @ 2015-09-10 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> ---
37 307 291
3.40282347E+38 1.7976931348623157E+308
8.98846567431157953864652595394512367E+0307
1.17549435E-38 2.2250738585072014E-308
2.00416836000897277799610805135016205E-0292
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-10 21:57 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
@ 2015-09-10 22:11 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-11 13:18 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
2015-09-14 11:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-10 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2015-09-10
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #5 from Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #4)
> 37 307 291
> 3.40282347E+38 1.7976931348623157E+308
> 8.98846567431157953864652595394512367E+0307
> 1.17549435E-38 2.2250738585072014E-308
> 2.00416836000897277799610805135016205E-0292
LDBL_MIN is smaller than DBL_MIN? I hadn't considered that…
Well, since the test's intent is to find impossible ranges, this can easily be
changed. Can you test that the patch below makes it pass for you?
Index: ieee_7.f90
===================================================================
--- ieee_7.f90 (revision 227316)
+++ ieee_7.f90 (working copy)
@@ -33,8 +33,8 @@
end if
if (ieee_selected_real_kind(0,0,3) /= -5) call abort
- if (ieee_selected_real_kind(precision(0._maxreal)+1) /= -1) call abort
- if (ieee_selected_real_kind(0,range(0._maxreal)+1) /= -2) call abort
- if (ieee_selected_real_kind(precision(0._maxreal)+1,range(0._maxreal)+1) /=
-3) call abort
+ if (ieee_selected_real_kind(100*precision(0._maxreal)) /= -1) call abort
+ if (ieee_selected_real_kind(0,100*range(0._maxreal)) /= -2) call abort
+ if (ieee_selected_real_kind(100*precision(0._maxreal),100*range(0._maxreal))
/= -3) call abort
end
>From gcc-bugs-return-496927-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu Sep 10 22:12:59 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-496927-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 80085 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2015 22:12:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 80037 invoked by uid 48); 10 Sep 2015 22:12:55 -0000
From: "fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/67531] No IEEE rounding support for powerpc long double type
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 22:12:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on assigned_to short_desc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-67531-4-VDbAPjUT96@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-67531-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-67531-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00905.txt.bz2
Content-length: 700
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idg531
Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2015-09-10
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|FAIL: |No IEEE rounding support
|gfortran.dg/ieee/large_2.f9 |for powerpc long double
|0 -O0 execution test |type
Ever confirmed|0 |1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-10 22:11 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-09-11 13:18 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
2015-09-14 11:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: schwab@linux-m68k.org @ 2015-09-11 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> ---
With that patch the test passes on all opt levels.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/67509] [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test
2015-09-08 22:47 [Bug fortran/67509] New: [6 regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ieee/ieee_7.f90 -O0 execution test schwab@linux-m68k.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-11 13:18 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
@ 2015-09-14 11:12 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-14 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67509
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread