* Someone broke complex arithmetic @ 2005-07-19 2:31 Steve Kargl 2005-07-19 2:45 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 2:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: fortran, gcc This is a heads up. Someone has broken complex arithmetic on mainline. I've just found this problem and unfortunately it will take me some time to cut the test program down to something managable. This could be a gfortran bug or it may be a middle/back end bug. Here's the output from a program that brought the problem to my attention. It uses downward recursion to compute spherical Bessel functions. NAG's F95 compiler n x jn(x) jn(cmplx(x,0)) 0 2.2900E+01 -3.4445E-02 -3.4445E-02 0.0000E+00 1 2.2900E+01 2.5337E-02 2.5337E-02 0.0000E+00 2 2.2900E+01 3.7765E-02 3.7765E-02 0.0000E+00 3 2.2900E+01 -1.7091E-02 -1.7091E-02 0.0000E+00 4 2.2900E+01 -4.2989E-02 -4.2989E-02 0.0000E+00 gfortran mainline n x jn(x) jn(cmplx(x,0)) 0 2.2900E+01 -3.4445E-02 -3.4445E-02 0.0000E+00 1 2.2900E+01 2.5337E-02 3.9638E-02 0.0000E+00 2 2.2900E+01 3.7765E-02 -5.0710E-02 0.0000E+00 3 2.2900E+01 -1.7091E-02 7.3035E-02 0.0000E+00 4 2.2900E+01 -4.2989E-02 -1.2032E-01 0.0000E+00 Notice the 3rd column is foobar. Also note that I'm seeing this problem on i386-*-freebsd and amd64-*-freebsd. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 2:31 Someone broke complex arithmetic Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 2:45 ` Steve Kargl 2005-07-19 3:02 ` Andrew Pinski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: fortran, gcc On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 07:31:27PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > Here's the output from a program that brought the problem > to my attention. It uses downward recursion to compute > spherical Bessel functions. > > NAG's F95 compiler > n x jn(x) jn(cmplx(x,0)) > 0 2.2900E+01 -3.4445E-02 -3.4445E-02 0.0000E+00 > 1 2.2900E+01 2.5337E-02 2.5337E-02 0.0000E+00 > 2 2.2900E+01 3.7765E-02 3.7765E-02 0.0000E+00 > 3 2.2900E+01 -1.7091E-02 -1.7091E-02 0.0000E+00 > 4 2.2900E+01 -4.2989E-02 -4.2989E-02 0.0000E+00 > gfortran in 4.0.1 gives the correct results shown above. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 2:45 ` Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 3:02 ` Andrew Pinski 2005-07-19 3:11 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Andrew Pinski @ 2005-07-19 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve Kargl; +Cc: gcc, fortran On Jul 18, 2005, at 10:45 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 07:31:27PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: >> >> Here's the output from a program that brought the problem >> to my attention. It uses downward recursion to compute >> spherical Bessel functions. >> >> NAG's F95 compiler >> n x jn(x) jn(cmplx(x,0)) >> 0 2.2900E+01 -3.4445E-02 -3.4445E-02 0.0000E+00 >> 1 2.2900E+01 2.5337E-02 2.5337E-02 0.0000E+00 >> 2 2.2900E+01 3.7765E-02 3.7765E-02 0.0000E+00 >> 3 2.2900E+01 -1.7091E-02 -1.7091E-02 0.0000E+00 >> 4 2.2900E+01 -4.2989E-02 -4.2989E-02 0.0000E+00 >> > > gfortran in 4.0.1 gives the correct results shown above. This is most likely the same problem as PR 22504. Could you attach your program to that PR? -- Pinski ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 3:02 ` Andrew Pinski @ 2005-07-19 3:11 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 3:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Pinski; +Cc: gcc, fortran On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 11:02:12PM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > This is most likely the same problem as PR 22504. > > Could you attach your program to that PR? > I'm still cutting it down. I'll attach it to the PR when its much small than it is now. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <42D7F643.2080202@wanadoo.fr>]
[parent not found: <200507160334.j6G3Yad26764@makai.watson.ibm.com>]
[parent not found: <42DA8C72.2020207@wanadoo.fr>]
[parent not found: <200507172119.j6HLJPd26676@makai.watson.ibm.com>]
[parent not found: <42DAD899.2090403@wanadoo.fr>]
[parent not found: <200507172332.j6HNWmd27626@makai.watson.ibm.com>]
[parent not found: <42DB3313.2070707@wanadoo.fr>]
[parent not found: <200507182101.j6IL1fd27934@makai.watson.ibm.com>]
[parent not found: <42DC9232.10807@wanadoo.fr>]
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic [not found] ` <42DC9232.10807@wanadoo.fr> @ 2005-07-19 7:37 ` FX Coudert 2005-07-19 17:17 ` Daniel Berlin 2005-07-25 10:49 ` Gerald Pfeifer 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: FX Coudert @ 2005-07-19 7:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Thomas; +Cc: Steve Kargl, pinskia, fortran, gcc > There are regressions involving complex aritmetic in the testsuite too: > FAIL: gfortran.dg/real_const_1.f (test for excess errors) > WARNING: gfortran.dg/real_const_1.f compilation failed to produce > executable The regression appeared between 20050716 and 20050717 on i686-linux and i386-freebsd. > Don't folk run the gfortran testsuite??? No. People don't regtest with gfortran enabled. That's a pity, since it only adds little time to the total build and testing time. I asked geoffk on 2005-06-17 to add gfortran on the GCC Automated Testing System, and he's investigating. We can only hope this can be done soon. FX ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 7:37 ` FX Coudert @ 2005-07-19 17:17 ` Daniel Berlin 2005-07-19 17:31 ` Steve Kargl 2005-07-25 10:49 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Daniel Berlin @ 2005-07-19 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FX Coudert; +Cc: Paul Thomas, Steve Kargl, pinskia, fortran, gcc On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 09:37 +0200, FX Coudert wrote: > > There are regressions involving complex aritmetic in the testsuite too: > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/real_const_1.f (test for excess errors) > > WARNING: gfortran.dg/real_const_1.f compilation failed to produce > > executable > > The regression appeared between 20050716 and 20050717 on i686-linux and > i386-freebsd. > > Don't folk run the gfortran testsuite??? > > No. People don't regtest with gfortran enabled. That's a pity, si > ce it > only adds little time to the total build and testing time. I do. I noticed this on all my trees around that time, and since their has been churn in libgfortran, i assumed it was someone doing something they hadn't quite finished yet :) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 17:17 ` Daniel Berlin @ 2005-07-19 17:31 ` Steve Kargl 2005-07-19 18:21 ` Richard Henderson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Berlin; +Cc: FX Coudert, Paul Thomas, pinskia, fortran, gcc On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 01:17:22PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 09:37 +0200, FX Coudert wrote: > > > There are regressions involving complex aritmetic in the testsuite too: > > > FAIL: gfortran.dg/real_const_1.f (test for excess errors) > > > WARNING: gfortran.dg/real_const_1.f compilation failed to produce > > > executable > > > > The regression appeared between 20050716 and 20050717 on i686-linux and > > i386-freebsd. > This failure may be different than the problem I'm seeing. > > > Don't folk run the gfortran testsuite??? > > > > No. People don't regtest with gfortran enabled. That's a pity, since > > it only adds little time to the total build and testing time. > I do. > > I noticed this on all my trees around that time, and since their has > been churn in libgfortran, i assumed it was someone doing something they > hadn't quite finished yet :) The 3rd and 4th columns should be the same. troutmask:sgk[207] gfc -o z zy.f90 troutmask:sgk[208] ./z 0 2.2900E+01 -3.4445E-02 -3.4445E-02 0.0000E+00 1 2.2900E+01 2.5337E-02 2.5337E-02 0.0000E+00 2 2.2900E+01 3.7765E-02 3.7765E-02 0.0000E+00 3 2.2900E+01 -1.7091E-02 -1.7091E-02 0.0000E+00 4 2.2900E+01 -4.2989E-02 -4.2989E-02 0.0000E+00 troutmask:sgk[209] gfc -o z -O zy.f90 troutmask:sgk[211] ./z 0 2.2900E+01 -3.4445E-02 -3.4445E-02 0.0000E+00 1 2.2900E+01 2.5337E-02 3.9638E-02 0.0000E+00 2 2.2900E+01 3.7765E-02 -5.0710E-02 0.0000E+00 3 2.2900E+01 -1.7091E-02 7.3035E-02 0.0000E+00 4 2.2900E+01 -4.2989E-02 -1.2032E-01 0.0000E+00 troutmask:sgk[213] gfc --version GNU Fortran 95 (GCC 4.1.0 20050712 (experimental)) Someone broke optimization of complex arithmetic. A 2005-06-01 mainline gives the expected answer. A 2005-06-15 mainline is broken. I'll continue my binary search. Fortunately, building gcc on a dual opteron system with 12 GB of memory goes fairly quick. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 17:31 ` Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 18:21 ` Richard Henderson 2005-07-19 18:32 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Richard Henderson @ 2005-07-19 18:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve Kargl; +Cc: Daniel Berlin, FX Coudert, Paul Thomas, pinskia, fortran, gcc On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:31:13AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > Someone broke optimization of complex arithmetic. A 2005-06-01 > mainline gives the expected answer. A 2005-06-15 mainline is > broken. I'll continue my binary search. Fortunately, building > gcc on a dual opteron system with 12 GB of memory goes fairly > quick. It's sure to be my complex reorg. You can quit searching and just file a bug. r~ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 18:21 ` Richard Henderson @ 2005-07-19 18:32 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2005-07-19 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Henderson, Daniel Berlin, FX Coudert, Paul Thomas, pinskia, fortran, gcc On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 11:20:51AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:31:13AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > Someone broke optimization of complex arithmetic. A 2005-06-01 > > mainline gives the expected answer. A 2005-06-15 mainline is > > broken. I'll continue my binary search. Fortunately, building > > gcc on a dual opteron system with 12 GB of memory goes fairly > > quick. > > It's sure to be my complex reorg. You can quit searching and just > file a bug. > Andrew Pinksia suggested the bug is the same as PR 22504, so I've attached my Fortran 90 code to that PR. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: Someone broke complex arithmetic 2005-07-19 7:37 ` FX Coudert 2005-07-19 17:17 ` Daniel Berlin @ 2005-07-25 10:49 ` Gerald Pfeifer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 2005-07-25 10:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FX Coudert; +Cc: Paul Thomas, Steve Kargl, pinskia, fortran, gcc On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, FX Coudert wrote: >> Don't folk run the gfortran testsuite??? > No. People don't regtest with gfortran enabled. That's a pity, since it only > adds little time to the total build and testing time. I believe on of the reasons people often do not build with gfortran enabled is that this requires additional libraries which are not part of common system configurations and do not come with GCC either. Gerald ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-07-25 10:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-07-19 2:31 Someone broke complex arithmetic Steve Kargl
2005-07-19 2:45 ` Steve Kargl
2005-07-19 3:02 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-07-19 3:11 ` Steve Kargl
[not found] <42D7F643.2080202@wanadoo.fr>
[not found] ` <200507160334.j6G3Yad26764@makai.watson.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <42DA8C72.2020207@wanadoo.fr>
[not found] ` <200507172119.j6HLJPd26676@makai.watson.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <42DAD899.2090403@wanadoo.fr>
[not found] ` <200507172332.j6HNWmd27626@makai.watson.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <42DB3313.2070707@wanadoo.fr>
[not found] ` <200507182101.j6IL1fd27934@makai.watson.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <42DC9232.10807@wanadoo.fr>
2005-07-19 7:37 ` FX Coudert
2005-07-19 17:17 ` Daniel Berlin
2005-07-19 17:31 ` Steve Kargl
2005-07-19 18:21 ` Richard Henderson
2005-07-19 18:32 ` Steve Kargl
2005-07-25 10:49 ` Gerald Pfeifer
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).