On 21.06.21 22:31, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 6/21/21 5:42 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
OK – but see some comments below.
Revised patch attached. How's this one?
LGTM - thanks!
Tobias
-
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstrasse 201, 80634 München
Registergericht Münch
On 6/21/21 5:42 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 21.06.21 08:05, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I ran into this bug in CFI_allocate while testing something else and
then realized there was already a PR open for it. It seems like an
easy fix, and I've used Tobias's test case from the issue more or less
v
Hi José,
On 21.06.21 19:52, José Rui Faustino de Sousa wrote:
On 21/06/21 16:46, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Well, as said: directly into the compiler where currently the call to
libgomp is.
(should be libgfortran)
I meant converting the operation done
by the libgfortran/runtime/ISO_Fortran_binding
Hi Jose and Tobias,
I am glad that you produced the list of patches waiting for approval. I
have been out of action following a house move and will likely not be doing
any reviewing or contributing for another month or so. As soon as I am
ready, I will make use of this list to check out what has n
Hi Tobias,
On 21/06/21 16:46, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Well, as said: directly into the compiler where currently the call to
libgomp is.
>
I don't think I understand were you mean. You don't mean the includes in
"f95-lang.c" do you?
Best regards,
José Rui
Hi José,
On 21.06.21 17:51, José Rui Faustino de Sousa via Fortran wrote:
On 21/06/21 13:46, Tobias Burnus wrote:
(in principle, I'd like to have the libgfortran function moved to the
compiler proper to avoid some issues, but that's admittedly a task
independent of your work.)
cfi_desc_to_gfc
On 21/06/21 13:46, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi José,
(in principle, I'd like to have the libgfortran function moved to the
compiler proper to avoid some issues, but that's admittedly a task
independent of your work.)
cfi_desc_to_gfc_desc and gfc_desc_to_cfi_desc from ISO_c_binding.c, right?
Sinc
Hi Tobias,
On 21/06/21 12:37, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Thus: Do you have a list of patches pending review?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055924.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055933.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056168.html
http
Hi José,
(in principle, I'd like to have the libgfortran function moved to the
compiler proper to avoid some issues, but that's admittedly a task
independent of your work.)
On 15.06.21 01:09, José Rui Faustino de Sousa via Fortran wrote:
Update to a proposed patch to:
Bug 93308 - bind(c) subrou
Hi José,
On 17.06.21 21:34, José Rui Faustino de Sousa via Gcc-patches wrote:
Update to a proposed patch to:
PR100683 - Array initialization refuses valid
due to more errors being found...
Patch tested only on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
LGTM – sorry for the very belated review.
Add call to simplify
Any reason that you did not put it under
gfortran.dg/coarray/
such that it is also run with -fcoarray=lib (-lcaf_single)?
I know that the issue only exists for single, but it also makes
sense to check that libcaf_single works
In that sense, I wonder whether also the other CO_* should be
ch
Hi Harald,
sorry for being way behind my review duties :-(
On 10.06.21 20:52, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
+static bool
+substring_has_constant_len (gfc_expr *e)
+{
+ ptrdiff_t istart, iend;
+ size_t length;
+ bool equal_length = false;
+
+ if (e->ts.type != BT_CHARACTER
+ || !e->r
On 21.06.21 08:05, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
I ran into this bug in CFI_allocate while testing something else and
then realized there was already a PR open for it. It seems like an
easy fix, and I've used Tobias's test case from the issue more or less
verbatim.
There were some other bugs added o
On 18.06.21 16:20, Julian Brown wrote:
This patch reverts the part of Tobias's patch for PR target/96306 that
disables 128-bit integer support for AMD GCN.
OK for mainline (assuming the previous patches are in first)?
Well, as the only reason for that patch was to avoid tons of fails/ICE due
t
14 matches
Mail list logo
