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
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
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
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 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
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 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
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 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
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 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 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
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
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
14 matches
Mail list logo
