Hi all, on IRC: 15:28:22 dominiq: vehre: add /* FALLTHROUGH */
Done and committed as obvious as r243023. - Andre On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 15:22:46 +0100 Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > Janus, > > those fallthroughs are fully intentional and each and everyone is documented. > When you can tell me a way to remove those false positive warnings I am happy > to do so, when it comes at no extra costs at runtime. > > - Andre > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 14:48:38 +0100 > Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > Hi Andre, > > > > after your commit I see several warnings when compiling libgfortran > > (see below). Could you please fix those (if possible)? > > > > Thanks, > > Janus > > > > > > > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c: In function > > ‘_gfortran_caf_is_present’: > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2949:8: warning: > > this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > > if (riter->next == NULL) > > ^ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2952:3: note: here > > case CAF_ARR_REF_VECTOR: > > ^~~~ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2976:8: warning: > > this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > > if (riter->next == NULL) > > ^ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2979:3: note: here > > case CAF_ARR_REF_VECTOR: > > ^~~~ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2949:8: warning: > > this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > > if (riter->next == NULL) > > ^ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2952:3: note: here > > case CAF_ARR_REF_VECTOR: > > ^~~~ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2976:8: warning: > > this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > > if (riter->next == NULL) > > ^ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2979:3: note: here > > case CAF_ARR_REF_VECTOR: > > ^~~~ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c: In function > > ‘_gfortran_caf_get_by_ref’: > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:1863:29: warning: > > ‘src_size’ may be used uninitialized in this function > > [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] > > if (size == 0 || src_size == 0) > > ~~~~~~~~~^~~~ > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c: In function > > ‘_gfortran_caf_send_by_ref’: > > /home/jweil/gcc/gcc7/trunk/libgfortran/caf/single.c:2649:29: warning: > > ‘src_size’ may be used uninitialized in this function > > [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] > > if (size == 0 || src_size == 0) > > ~~~~~~~~~^~~~ > > > > > > > > > > 2016-11-30 14:30 GMT+01:00 Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de>: > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > > thanks for the review. Committed with the changes requested and the one > > > reported by Dominique on IRC for coarray_lib_alloc_4 when compiled with > > > -m32 as r243021. > > > > > > Thanks for the review and tests. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Andre > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 07:49:13 +0100 > > > Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Dear Andre, > > >> > > >> This all looks OK to me. The only comment that I have that you might > > >> deal with before committing is that some of the Boolean expressions, > > >> eg: > > >> + int caf_dereg_mode > > >> + = ((caf_mode & GFC_STRUCTURE_CAF_MODE_IN_COARRAY) != 0 > > >> + || c->attr.codimension) > > >> + ? ((caf_mode & GFC_STRUCTURE_CAF_MODE_DEALLOC_ONLY) != 0 > > >> + ? GFC_CAF_COARRAY_DEALLOCATE_ONLY > > >> + : GFC_CAF_COARRAY_DEREGISTER) > > >> + : GFC_CAF_COARRAY_NOCOARRAY; > > >> > > >> are getting be sufficiently convoluted that a small, appropriately > > >> named, helper function might be clearer. Of course, this is true of > > >> many parts of gfortran but it is not too late to start making the code > > >> a bit clearer. > > >> > > >> You can commit to the present trunk as far as I am concerned. I know > > >> that the caf enthusiasts will test it to bits before release! > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> > > >> Paul > > >> > > >> > > >> On 28 November 2016 at 19:33, Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > > >> > PING! > > >> > > > >> > I know it's a lengthy patch, but comments would be nice anyway. > > >> > > > >> > - Andre > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 20:46:50 +0100 > > >> > Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi all, > > >> >> > > >> >> attached patch addresses the need of extending the API of the caf-libs > > >> >> to enable allocatable components asynchronous allocation. Allocatable > > >> >> components in derived type coarrays are different from regular > > >> >> coarrays or coarrayed components. The latter have to be allocated on > > >> >> all images or on none. Furthermore is the allocation a point of > > >> >> synchronisation. > > >> >> > > >> >> For allocatable components the F2008 allows to have some allocated on > > >> >> some images and on others not. Furthermore is the registration with > > >> >> the caf-lib, that an allocatable component is present in a derived > > >> >> type coarray no longer a synchronisation point. To implement these > > >> >> features two new types of coarray registration have been introduced. > > >> >> The first one just registering the component with the caf-lib and the > > >> >> latter doing the allocate. Furthermore has the caf-API been extended > > >> >> to provide a query function to learn about the allocation status of a > > >> >> component on a remote image. > > >> >> > > >> >> Sorry, that the patch is rather lengthy. Most of this is due to the > > >> >> structure_alloc_comps' signature change. The routine and its wrappers > > >> >> are used rather often which needed the appropriate changes. > > >> >> > > >> >> I know I left two or three TODOs in the patch to remind me of things I > > >> >> have to investigate further. For the current state these TODOs are no > > >> >> reason to hold back the patch. The third party library opencoarrays > > >> >> implements the mpi-part of the caf-model and will change in sync. It > > >> >> would of course be advantageous to just have to say: With gcc-7 > > >> >> gfortran implements allocatable components in derived coarrays nearly > > >> >> completely. > > >> >> > > >> >> I know we are in stage 3. But the patch bootstraps and regtests ok on > > >> >> x86_64-linux/F23. So, is it ok for trunk or shall it go to 7.2? > > >> >> > > >> >> Regards, > > >> >> Andre > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de > > -- Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
Index: libgfortran/caf/single.c =================================================================== --- libgfortran/caf/single.c (Revision 243021) +++ libgfortran/caf/single.c (Arbeitskopie) @@ -2949,6 +2949,7 @@ if (riter->next == NULL) break; /* else fall through reporting an error. */ + /* FALLTHROUGH */ case CAF_ARR_REF_VECTOR: case CAF_ARR_REF_RANGE: case CAF_ARR_REF_OPEN_END: @@ -2976,6 +2977,7 @@ if (riter->next == NULL) break; /* else fall through reporting an error. */ + /* FALLTHROUGH */ case CAF_ARR_REF_VECTOR: case CAF_ARR_REF_RANGE: case CAF_ARR_REF_OPEN_END:
