From: Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.thomas@gmail.com>
To: Alessandro Fanfarillo <fanfarillo.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: Mikael Morin <morin-mikael@orange.fr>,
Andre Vehreschild <vehre@gmx.de>, gfortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
Subject: Re: [Fortran, Patch] First patch for coarray FAILED IMAGES (TS 18508)
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 11:23:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGkQGiJCkmTQrbBBMckKty+qGjtO9CPoseg_BHRvAvFW4e8PQQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHqFgjWxRi_0EqVowQRMxMi70zKfkGF_oB8iPy_ZjJ6nf1DkOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Sandro,
As far as I can see, this is OK barring a couple of minor wrinkles and
a question:
For coarray_failed_images_err.f90 and coarray_image_status_err.f90 you
have used the option -fdump-tree-original without making use of the
tree dump.
Mikael asked you to provide an executable test with -fcoarray=single.
Is this not possible for some reason?
Otherwise, this is OK for trunk.
Thanks for the patch.
Paul
On 4 August 2016 at 05:07, Alessandro Fanfarillo
<fanfarillo.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> * PING *
>
> 2016-07-21 13:05 GMT-06:00 Alessandro Fanfarillo <fanfarillo.gcc@gmail.com>:
>> Dear Mikael and all,
>>
>> in attachment the new patch, built and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Alessandro
>>
>> 2016-07-20 13:17 GMT-06:00 Mikael Morin <morin-mikael@orange.fr>:
>>> Le 20/07/2016 à 11:39, Andre Vehreschild a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Hi Mikael,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> + if(st == ST_FAIL_IMAGE)
>>>>>> + new_st.op = EXEC_FAIL_IMAGE;
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + gcc_unreachable();
>>>>>
>>>>> You can use
>>>>> gcc_assert (st == ST_FAIL_IMAGE);
>>>>> foo...;
>>>>> instead of
>>>>> if (st == ST_FAIL_IMAGE)
>>>>> foo...;
>>>>> else
>>>>> gcc_unreachable ();
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Be careful, this is not 100% identical in the general case. For older
>>>> gcc version (gcc < 4008) gcc_assert() is mapped to nothing, esp. not to
>>>> an abort(), so the behavior can change. But in this case everything is
>>>> fine, because the patch is most likely not backported.
>>>>
>>> Didn't know about this. The difference seems to be very subtle.
>>> I don't mind much anyway. The original version can stay if preferred, this
>>> was just a suggestion.
>>>
>>> By the way, if the function is inlined in its single caller, the assert or
>>> unreachable statement can be removed, which avoids choosing between them.
>>> That's another suggestion.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return MATCH_YES;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + syntax:
>>>>>> + gfc_syntax_error (st);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return MATCH_ERROR;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +match
>>>>>> +gfc_match_fail_image (void)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + /* if (!gfc_notify_std (GFC_STD_F2008_TS, "FAIL IMAGE statement
>>>>>> at %C")) */
>>>>>> + /* return MATCH_ERROR; */
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> Can this be uncommented?
>>>>>
>>>>>> + return fail_image_statement (ST_FAIL_IMAGE);
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* Match LOCK/UNLOCK statement. Syntax:
>>>>>> LOCK ( lock-variable [ , lock-stat-list ] )
>>>>>> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
>>>>>> b/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c index 1aaf4e2..b2f5596 100644
>>>>>> --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c
>>>>>> @@ -1647,6 +1647,24 @@ trans_this_image (gfc_se * se, gfc_expr
>>>>>> *expr) m, lbound));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +static void
>>>>>> +gfc_conv_intrinsic_image_status (gfc_se *se, gfc_expr *expr)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + unsigned int num_args;
>>>>>> + tree *args,tmp;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + num_args = gfc_intrinsic_argument_list_length (expr);
>>>>>> + args = XALLOCAVEC (tree, num_args);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + gfc_conv_intrinsic_function_args (se, expr, args, num_args);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (flag_coarray == GFC_FCOARRAY_LIB)
>>>>>> + {
>>>>>
>>>>> Can everything be put under the if?
>>>>> Does it work with -fcoarray=single?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IMO coarray=single should not generate code here, therefore putting
>>>> everything under the if should to fine.
>>>>
>>> My point was more avoiding generating code for the arguments if they are not
>>> used in the end.
>>> Regarding the -fcoarray=single case, the function returns a result, which
>>> can be used in an expression, so I don't think it will work without at least
>>> hardcoding a fixed value as result in that case.
>>> But even that wouldn't be enough, as the function wouldn't work consistently
>>> with the fail image statement.
>>>
>>>> Sorry for the comments ...
>>>>
>>> Comments are welcome here, as far as I know. ;-)
>>>
>>> Mikael
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits.
Albert Einstein
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-09 11:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-06 21:05 Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-06-21 16:59 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-07-04 22:46 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-07-15 17:34 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-07-19 18:56 ` Mikael Morin
2016-07-20 9:39 ` Andre Vehreschild
2016-07-20 19:18 ` Mikael Morin
2016-07-21 19:05 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-08-04 3:09 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-08-09 11:23 ` Paul Richard Thomas [this message]
2016-08-09 17:44 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-09-07 21:04 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
[not found] ` <CAHqFgjXbwQQnnZp5N+WtWnxNxWducGcU9QSdHRhCdPwNf1tdBQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-09-19 15:58 ` Andre Vehreschild
2016-09-21 18:37 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-09-28 13:52 ` Alessandro Fanfarillo
2016-08-08 17:12 ` Dan Nagle
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=CAGkQGiJCkmTQrbBBMckKty+qGjtO9CPoseg_BHRvAvFW4e8PQQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=paul.richard.thomas@gmail.com \
--cc=burnus@net-b.de \
--cc=fanfarillo.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=fortran@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=morin-mikael@orange.fr \
--cc=vehre@gmx.de \
/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: link
Be 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).