Dear All, Committed to trunk as revision 212486.
Cheers Paul On 12 July 2014 20:52, Tobias Burnus <bur...@net-b.de> wrote: > Dear Paul, > > the patch attached to the PR looks good to me for GCC 4.8, 4.9 and 4.10. For > 4.9.1 vs. 4.9.2, it's Jakub's call. > > Tobias > > > Paul Richard Thomas wrote: >> >> Dear Jakub, >> >> PR61780 came at us out of the blue on the 11th. It's quite a nasty >> wrong code bug but it was planted slightly more than three years ago. >> I don't know if that is because the bug is rarely encountered or is >> going into code unnoticed. I posted a fix for it today that is pretty >> bomb-proof and bootstraps and regtests OK. Do you think that I should >> slip it into 4.9 before release of 4.9.1 or should I hold off? I am >> happy either way but could do the business right now. I realise that >> on the scale of blocking regressions it doesn't even appear on the >> meter. >> >> Best regards >> >> Paul >> >> On 12 July 2014 17:18, paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com >> <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61780 >>> >>> --- Comment #3 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com >>> <paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com> --- >>> Dear Mikael, >>> >>> I didn't see your posting, which was about an hour before mine. At >>> least we came to the same conclusion! >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> On 12 July 2014 13:43, mikael at gcc dot gnu.org >>> <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61780 >>>> >>>> Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: >>>> >>>> What |Removed |Added >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> CC| |mikael at gcc dot >>>> gnu.org >>>> >>>> --- Comment #1 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> --- >>>> This sets loop reversal in dependency.c: >>>> /* Set reverse if backward dependence and not inhibited. */ >>>> if (reverse && reverse[n] == GFC_ENABLE_REVERSE) >>>> reverse[n] = (this_dep == GFC_DEP_BACKWARD) ? >>>> GFC_REVERSE_SET : reverse[n]; >>>> >>>> However, the 'n' used indexes over array ref dimension, so in the case >>>> at hand >>>> the second element is flagged as GFC_REVERSE_SET. >>>> But the 'reverse' array is used later on using scalarizer dimensions, >>>> and as >>>> y(k,4:n) and y(k,3:n-1) are one-dimension arrays, only the first element >>>> of >>>> 'reverse' is ever looked at. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You are receiving this mail because: >>>> You are on the CC list for the bug. >>> >>> -- >>> You are receiving this mail because: >>> You are on the CC list for the bug. >>> You are the assignee for the bug. >> >> >> > -- The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
