https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #23 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Oct 28 08:53:19 2017
New Revision: 254196
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254196&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-28 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/81758
* trans-expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #22 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Oct 28 08:49:26 2017
New Revision: 254195
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254195&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-10-28 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/81758
* trans-expr.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #21 from DIL ---
Greatly appreciate!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #20 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi Dmitry,
I will persist with 81758 until I have a satisfactory testcase and
then I promise that I will move to 80850.
Cheers
Paul
On 26 October 2017 at 15:20, liakhdi at ornl dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #19 from DIL ---
Hi Paul,
Great, thanks a lot! That was pretty quick. Upon a chance, as there is still a
momentum :), could you please take a brief look at bug #80850 to see whether it
may be related since you mentioned "allocation w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #18 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 42480
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42480&action=edit
A patch that fixes the problem
Following your tip, Dimtry, this does the job and regtests OK.
Will fix up a tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #17 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Hi Dmitry,
That's great. I'll let you know how I get on when I return. I knew
that it had to be a complicated pointer assignment or allocation with
source but couldn't deduce it by de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #16 from DIL ---
Hi Paul,
Thanks for looking into this issue. I ran the debugger again. The vtab
corruption occurs upon the first encounter in function VectorIterElement() in
line 720 of gfc_vector.F90. Just to make sure, that line b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #15 from Paul Thomas ---
Hi DIL,
On reflection, this is OK and agrees with your diagnosis:
> val_p._vptr = (struct __vtype__STAR * {ref-all}) &__vtab__STAR;
> val_p._len = 0;
> val_p._data = 0B;
> cep._vptr = (struct __vtype
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #14 from Paul Thomas ---
The chunk of offending code:
val_p=>NULL(); cep=>NULL()
cep=>this%element(offset,errc)
if(errc.eq.GFC_SUCCESS.and.associated(cep)) then
val_p=>cep%get_value(errc)
is trans
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #12)
> And with r241439, the test fails.
>
> Andre, any ideas?
This is sufficiently similar to PR82312 that I applied the patch for it to
7-branch (which I had to do a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
And with r241439, the test fails.
Andre, any ideas?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
With r241438, the test passes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #10 from DIL ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #9)
> I just checked on powerpc64 with a rather current trunk with
>
> gfc::bank testing status:0 (PASSED): Performance:
> 2888199.6889235629
> gfc::vecto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
I just checked on powerpc64 with a rather current trunk with
gfc::bank testing status:0 (PASSED): Performance:
2888199.6889235629
gfc::vector testing status:0 (PASSED): Perf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
17 matches
Mail list logo
