* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-09-28 10:06 ` mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk
2020-09-28 10:14 ` markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk @ 2020-09-28 10:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #1 from mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk ---
Reverting changes clearly addition test cases are required....
regards,
Mark
On 28/09/2020 10:48, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
>
> Bug ID: 97224
> Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to
> build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
> Product: gcc
> Version: 11.0
> Status: UNCONFIRMED
> Severity: normal
> Priority: P3
> Component: fortran
> Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
> Reporter: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
> CC: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org, markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org
> Target Milestone: ---
>
> The benchmark fails to build after
> r11-3487-ge5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc with the following error:
>
> 108 | SUBROUTINE AIMPAC(ACO,AIC,EXPON,ICENT,ITYPE,OE,OCCNO,
> | 1
> ......
> 920 | COMMON /INTRFC/ FRIEND,AIMPAC,RPAC,PLTORB,MOLPLT
> | 2
> Error: Global entity 'aimpac' at (1) cannot appear in a COMMON block at (2)
> parley.fppized.f:1118:23:
>
> 920 | COMMON /INTRFC/ FRIEND,AIMPAC,RPAC,PLTORB,MOLPLT
> | 2
> ......
> 1118 | SUBROUTINE PLTORB(IPAIRS,MAXBND,COEFS,COEFP,COEFD,COEFF,COEFG,
> | 1
> Error: Global entity 'pltorb' at (1) cannot appear in a COMMON block at (2)
> parley.fppized.f:464:23:
>
> 464 | SUBROUTINE MOLPLT(IPAIRS,MAXBND,MAXTYP,KINDS,KOLOR)
> | 1
> ......
> 920 | COMMON /INTRFC/ FRIEND,AIMPAC,RPAC,PLTORB,MOLPLT
> | 2
> Error: Global entity 'molplt' at (1) cannot appear in a COMMON block at (2)
>
> Patch seems to have been backported to all stable branches hence the
> regressions tags.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-28 10:06 ` [Bug fortran/97224] " mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk
@ 2020-09-28 10:14 ` markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-28 10:15 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-09-28 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |MOVED
--- Comment #2 from markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reopened 95614
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-28 10:06 ` [Bug fortran/97224] " mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk
2020-09-28 10:14 ` markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-09-28 10:15 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-28 10:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-09-28 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Cheers, thanks Mark!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-28 10:15 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-09-28 10:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-28 11:01 ` mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-09-28 10:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
You've reverted it only on the trunk and not on the release branches though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-28 10:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-09-28 11:01 ` mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk
2020-09-28 11:19 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk @ 2020-09-28 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #5 from mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk ---
in progress...
On 28/09/2020 11:43, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
>
> Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> You've reverted it only on the trunk and not on the release branches though.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-28 11:01 ` mark.eggleston at codethink dot co.uk
@ 2020-09-28 11:19 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-09-28 14:42 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-09-28 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
Last reconfirmed| |2020-09-28
Resolution|MOVED |---
Status|RESOLVED |NEW
Priority|P3 |P1
Ever confirmed|0 |1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-28 11:19 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-09-28 14:42 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2020-09-29 11:24 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu @ 2020-09-28 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:48:13AM +0000, tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
>
> Bug ID: 97224
> Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to
> build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
> Product: gcc
> Version: 11.0
> Status: UNCONFIRMED
> Severity: normal
> Priority: P3
> Component: fortran
> Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
> Reporter: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
> CC: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org, markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org
> Target Milestone: ---
>
> The benchmark fails to build after
> r11-3487-ge5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc with the following error:
>
> 108 | SUBROUTINE AIMPAC(ACO,AIC,EXPON,ICENT,ITYPE,OE,OCCNO,
> | 1
> ......
> 920 | COMMON /INTRFC/ FRIEND,AIMPAC,RPAC,PLTORB,MOLPLT
> | 2
> Error: Global entity 'aimpac' at (1) cannot appear in a COMMON block at (2)
> parley.fppized.f:1118:23:
>
Without access to the source code, which was conveniently omitted,
it cannot no be determined if gfortran is correct. The EBNF for COMMON
is
R873 common-stmt is COMMON
[ / [ common-block-name ] / ] common-block-object-list
[ [ , ] / [ common-block-name ] /
common-block-object-list ] ...
R874 common-block-object is variable-name [ ( array-spec ) ]
AIMPAC is the name of a subroutine. It is not a variable-name.
Unfortunately, there are 812 lines of missing code, so it is
not possible to tell if AIMPAC is declared in local scope to
something else, which blocks the global entity name.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-28 14:42 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
@ 2020-09-29 11:24 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
2020-10-02 14:33 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: drikosev at gmail dot com @ 2020-09-29 11:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
Ev Drikos <drikosev at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from Ev Drikos <drikosev at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 49286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49286&action=edit
regression example
Hello,
Indeed, the solution in PR/95614 has regressions,
because the attached program ie is rejected but it
was accepted by gcc-8.4
One could also exclude GSYM_SUBROUTINE & GSYM_FUNCTION
in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95614#c3
to have the attached program pr95614_aim2.f90 compile
smoothly.
Hope this isn't out of topic,
Ev. Drikos
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2020-09-29 11:24 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
@ 2020-10-02 14:33 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
2020-10-04 12:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: drikosev at gmail dot com @ 2020-10-02 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #8 from Ev Drikos <drikosev at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 49301
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49301&action=edit
test-case with a module
Hello again,
Here is another test-case with a module.
It's a question if this should fail or pass.
But gcc-8.4 compiles it without errors.
Ev. Drikos
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2020-10-02 14:33 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
@ 2020-10-04 12:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2020-10-04 15:02 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2020-10-04 12:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
I think the two attached patches are not pertinent: both tests use independent
translation units, so they should compile.
If I couple the TUs as in
SUBROUTINE AIMPAC(ACO,AIC,EXPON,ICENT,ITYPE,OE,OCCNO)
END
COMMON /INTRFC/ FRIEND,AIMPAC,RPAC,PLTORB,MOLPLT
call AIMPAC(ACO,AIC,EXPON,ICENT,ITYPE,OE,OCCNO)
END
or
module AIMPAC ! { dg-error "cannot appear" }
integer x
END
use AIMPAC
COMMON /INTRFC/ FRIEND,AIMPAC,RPAC,PLTORB,MOLPLT ! { dg-error "cannot appear"
}
END
I get
8 | call AIMPAC(ACO,AIC,EXPON,ICENT,ITYPE,OE,OCCNO)
| 1
Error: PROCEDURE attribute conflicts with COMMON attribute in 'aimpac' at (1)
for the first case and
5 | use AIMPAC
|
internal compiler error: in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at
fortran/trans-types.c:1120
for the second one.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2020-10-04 12:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2020-10-04 15:02 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
2020-12-04 14:16 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: drikosev at gmail dot com @ 2020-10-04 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #10 from Ev Drikos <drikosev at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> I think the two attached patches are not pertinent...
Possibly, you are right. I have no access to the
particular source code.
> I get
>
> 8 | call AIMPAC(ACO,AIC,EXPON,ICENT,ITYPE,OE,OCCNO)
> | 1
> Error: PROCEDURE attribute conflicts with COMMON attribute in 'aimpac' at (1)
>
Indeed, this is the error message by gcc-8.4 but the user
hasn't reported such an error message. I hope he will give
some feedback.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2020-10-04 15:02 ` drikosev at gmail dot com
@ 2020-12-04 14:16 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-12-07 8:32 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-12-07 14:31 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-12-04 14:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
@Taram: Is it still a problem that you can't build the benchmark?
I don't see the problem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2020-12-04 14:16 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-12-07 8:32 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-12-07 14:31 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-12-07 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
@Martin I believe this was re-opened as the patch was reverted on master but
was still pending reverts on the release branches.
@Mark I assume you committed the reverts to the branches too?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/97224] [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc
2020-09-28 9:48 [Bug fortran/97224] New: [8/9/10/11 Regression] SPECCPU 2006 Gamess fails to build after g:e5a76af3a2f3324efc60b4b2778ffb29d5c377bc tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2020-12-07 8:32 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-12-07 14:31 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-12-07 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #12)
> @Martin I believe this was re-opened as the patch was reverted on master but
> was still pending reverts on the release branches.
>
> @Mark I assume you committed the reverts to the branches too?
I see the reverts in release branches as well:
g:20ed049a8d7d5b879129c5550bfcde36a0c170ec
g:0676e194c753a1959ea7f7a05761a26466148bda
g:b65099a08e257cc9c93060c6299311faaa4b44e9
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread