> -----Original Message----- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:48 PM > To: Iyer, Balaji V > Cc: Richard Henderson; Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; Joseph S. > Myers; gcc-patches > Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 5:35 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Iyer, Balaji V <balaji.v.i...@intel.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > >>> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Richard Henderson > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 2:52 PM > >>> To: Iyer, Balaji V > >>> Cc: Jakub Jelinek; Aldy Hernandez; Jeff Law; 'Joseph S. Myers'; > >>> 'gcc-patches' > >>> Subject: Re: [PING]RE: [patch] cilkplus: Array notation for C patch > >>> > >>> On 05/28/2013 11:44 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > >>> > i Richard, Jakub et al.. > >>> > I think I have fixed everything requested by RTH > >>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01400.html). I think > >>> I have also moved the tests in the correct place Jakub requested. It > >>> is passing all the correct regression tests and not affecting others. > >>> > > >>> > Is this patch OK for trunk? > >>> > >>> Yes, it's ok. > >> > >> This patch is committed to trunk at revision 199389. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > > > > On Linux/x32, I got > > > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -O0 -fcilkplus execution > > test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -fcilkplus -O0 -std=c99 > > execution test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -fcilkplus -g -O0 -std=c99 > > execution test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -fcilkplus -g -std=c99 > > execution test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -fcilkplus -std=c99 > > execution test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -fcilkplus execution test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -g -O0 -fcilkplus execution > > test > > FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c -g -fcilkplus execution > > test > > > > > > [x32@gnu-35 gcc]$ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/bld/gcc/xgcc > > -B/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/bld/gcc/ > > /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/src-trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++- > common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c > > -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiagnostics-color=never -fcilkplus -g > > -O0 -std=c99 -fcilkplus -lm -m32 -o ./if_test.exe > > [x32@gnu-35 gcc]$ /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/bld/gcc/xgcc > > -B/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/bld/gcc/ > > /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/src-trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++- > common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c > > -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fdiagnostics-color=never -fcilkplus -g > > -O0 -std=c99 -fcilkplus -lm -mx32 -o ./if_test.exe > > [x32@gnu-35 gcc]$ ./if_test.exe > > [x32@gnu-35 gcc]$ echo $? > > 5 > > [x32@gnu-35 gcc]$ > > > > (gdb) r > > Starting program: > > /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/bld/gcc/testsuite/gcc/if_test.exe > > > > Breakpoint 1, main2 (argc=3, argv=0xffffd240) > > at /export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-x32/src-trunk/gcc/testsuite/c-c++- > common/cilk-plus/AN/if_test.c:131 > > 131 return 5; > > Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install > > glibc-2.16-30.1.fc18.x32 > > (gdb) p ii > > $1 = 0 > > (gdb) p array2_check > > $2 = {5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5} > > (gdb) p array2 > > $3 = {10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10} > > (gdb) > > > > Does cilkplus assume ptr_mode == word_mode? On x32, ptr_mode == > > SImode and word_mode == DImode. > > > > -- > > H.J. > > Comment out > > /* atoi(argv[1]) == 10, so it will convert all 10's to 5's */ > if (FourDArray[0:10:1][0:5:2][9:10:-1][x:y:z] + > FourDArray[0:10:1][0:5:2][9:-10:1][x:y:z] != 20) > array2[:] = 10; > else > array2[:] = 5; > > makes the problem to disappear.
Thanks for reporting this. Let me investigate and I will get back ASAP. > > -- > H.J.
