On 5/27/25 2:19 PM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Jerry, all,
that was entirely my fault - attempting a last-minute cleanup
that reordered code, trying to use a refactoring. I've put
on my brown bag and pushed a corrections as obvious as:
r16-921-g74a2281ae18c6d.
See attached.
Caveat: this was tested
Jerry, all,
that was entirely my fault - attempting a last-minute cleanup
that reordered code, trying to use a refactoring. I've put
on my brown bag and pushed a corrections as obvious as:
r16-921-g74a2281ae18c6d.
See attached.
Caveat: this was tested on top of r16-915, as I cannot compile
an
After my last commit, I always rerun make check-fortran.
Now I see a bunch of fails. I reverted my patch locally and did a
rebuild and I still see these. Heralds patch still in there.
No failures after reverting this:
commit r16-914-g787a8dec1acedf5561c8ee43bed0b3653fca150d
Author: Harald Anl
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: nd
> Subject: Re: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprecation of
> -mstructure-size-boundary
>
> On 09/08/17 06:25, Michael Collison wrote:
>> Because the comment (for example) in g+=.dg/ext/packed8.C says
>>
>> /
option.
-Original Message-
From: Richard Earnshaw (lists) [mailto:richard.earns...@arm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 1:21 AM
To: Michael Collison ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: nd
Subject: Re: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprecation of
-mstructure-size-boundary
On
---
> From: Richard Earnshaw (lists) [mailto:richard.earns...@arm.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 5:32 AM
> To: Michael Collison ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: nd
> Subject: Re: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprecation of
> -mstructure-size-boundary
>
> On
ary=8 option why was it added
in the first place?
-Original Message-
From: Richard Earnshaw (lists) [mailto:richard.earns...@arm.com]
Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 5:32 AM
To: Michael Collison ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: nd
Subject: Re: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprec
On 06/08/17 00:25, Michael Collison wrote:
> This patch fixes test case failures on arm targets due to
> '-mstructure-size-boundary' being deprecated. The test cases were failing
> because a warning was being issued and due to the fact that the size of
> packed and unpacked structures is the sam
This patch fixes test case failures on arm targets due to
'-mstructure-size-boundary' being deprecated. The test cases were failing
because a warning was being issued and due to the fact that the size of packed
and unpacked structures is the same after deprecating
'-mstructure-size-boundary'
O
Hi all,
thanks for the input and reviews. I have committed this patch as r243647.
Regards,
Andre
On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 15:49:33 +0100
Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> Thanks for doing this work with the instrumented compiler. It was a
> great help with PR78350.
>
> As for the
> Jerry: trans-expr.c::gfc_conv_cst_int_power()
> I have added comment to new C++ code. Would you like to add something to it?
Note that the wi changes have occurred at revision r210113.
>
> The updated patch bootstraps and regtests fine on x86_64-linux/f23 on a
> regular
> and on an instrument
Hi Andre,
Thanks for doing this work with the instrumented compiler. It was a
great help with PR78350.
As for the patch - OK for trunk.
Paul
On 11 December 2016 at 14:01, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
> Hi Mikael, hi Jerry, hi Steve, hi Jane, hi Thomas, hi Paul, hi all,
>
> thanks for all the input
Hi Mikael, hi Jerry, hi Steve, hi Jane, hi Thomas, hi Paul, hi all,
thanks for all the input you gave on the patch I have present. I tried to
address all of it in the new version of the patch attached.
Mikael: data.c::create_character_initializer()
I have remove the test for rvalue->value.charact
Hello,
Le 09/12/2016 à 11:55, Andre Vehreschild a écrit :
Hi Mikael,
thanks a lot for your comments. Note I also have added the reply to your latest
email here.
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 23:49:57 +0100
Mikael Morin wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/data.c b/gcc/fortran/data.c
index 139ce88..4f835b
Hi Mikael,
thanks a lot for your comments. Note I also have added the reply to your latest
email here.
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 23:49:57 +0100
Mikael Morin wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/data.c b/gcc/fortran/data.c
> > index 139ce88..4f835b3 100644
> > --- a/gcc/fortran/data.c
> > +++ b/gcc/fo
Hello,
Le 08/12/2016 à 23:49, Mikael Morin a écrit :
Le 08/12/2016 à 14:39, Andre Vehreschild a écrit :
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
index 2e6ef2a..8173ba9 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
@@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ gfc_build_qu
Le 08/12/2016 à 14:39, Andre Vehreschild a écrit :
Hi all, hi Dominique,
this is the "compile time part 1" (ctp1) patch to fix the issues reported in
gfortran by a sanitized compiler when compiling the testsuite. The patch
addresses all issues besides leaks (ASAN_OPTIONS="detect_leaks=false". Mo
Hi all, hi Dominique,
this is the "compile time part 1" (ctp1) patch to fix the issues reported in
gfortran by a sanitized compiler when compiling the testsuite. The patch
addresses all issues besides leaks (ASAN_OPTIONS="detect_leaks=false". Most of
the issues were about assuming certain kinds of
patches@gcc.gnu.org; Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: Re: [Ping]: [Patch] [AArch64] PR target 66049: fix add/extend gcc
> test suite failures
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 06:39:36AM +0100, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
> > Ping!
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: g
To: James Greenhalgh (james.greenha...@arm.com); gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrill Tkachov (kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com); ramana.radhakrish...@arm.com;
> seg...@kernel.crashing.org; Marcus Shawcroft (marcus.shawcr...@arm.com)
> Subject: [Patch] [AArch64] PR target 66049: fix add/extend gcc
); ramana.radhakrish...@arm.com;
seg...@kernel.crashing.org; Marcus Shawcroft (marcus.shawcr...@arm.com)
Subject: [Patch] [AArch64] PR target 66049: fix add/extend gcc test suite
failures
Hi Maintainers,
Please find the attached patch, that fixes add/extend gcc test suite failures
in Aarch64
achov [mailto:kyrylo.tkac...@foss.arm.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:13 PM
>>> To: Kumar, Venkataramanan; James Greenhalgh; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>>> Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan; seg...@kernel.crashing.org; Marcus Shawcroft
>>> Subject: Re: [Patch] [AArch6
@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan; seg...@kernel.crashing.org; Marcus Shawcroft
Subject: Re: [Patch] [AArch64] PR target 66049: fix add/extend gcc test suite
failures
Hi Venkat,
On 19/05/15 16:37, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
Hi Maintainers,
Please find the attached patch, that fixes add/extend gcc
hakrishnan; seg...@kernel.crashing.org; Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: Re: [Patch] [AArch64] PR target 66049: fix add/extend gcc test suite
> failures
>
> Hi Venkat,
>
> On 19/05/15 16:37, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
> > Hi Maintainers,
> >
> > Please find the attached patch,
Hi Maintainers,
Please find the attached patch, that fixes add/extend gcc test suite failures
in Aarch64 target.
Ref: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66049
These tests started to fail after we prevented combiner from converting shift
RTX to mult RTX, when the RTX is not inside
Hi Venkat,
On 19/05/15 16:37, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
Hi Maintainers,
Please find the attached patch, that fixes add/extend gcc test suite failures
in Aarch64 target.
Ref: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66049
These tests started to fail after we prevented combiner from
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it
> > > was added for other *-linux targets? This seems to define SPECs that
> > > should have been necessary before now.
>
> This was comitted by Joseph with revision 168711 and s
On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 06:24 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Include gnu-user.h in tm_file.
> > * config/rs6000/sysv4.h (CC!_SPEC): Undefine it before defining it.
> > * config/rs6000/
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 15:06 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included bef
On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 15:06 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it
> > > was added for other *-linux target
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it
> > was added for other *-linux targets? This seems to define SPECs that
> > should have been necessa
On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:53 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:40:31AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This patch is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
>
> Ok.
Ok, I committed this as revision 212899. Thanks!
Peter
On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:54 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:38:22AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
>
> Ok.
Ok, I committed this as revision 212898. Thanks!
Peter
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:38:22AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> This is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
Ok.
Jakub
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:40:31AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> This patch is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
Ok.
Jakub
This patch is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
Thanks, David
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> With a recent mainline libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a
> lot of mainline ASAN test suite failures with the foll
This is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
Thanks, David
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> With a recent mainline libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a
> lot of mainline ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
&
With a recent mainline libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a
lot of mainline ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you should
either link runtime to your application or manually preload it
With a recent mainline libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a
lot of mainline ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you should
either link runtime to your application or manually preload it
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > > This passed bootstrap and regtesting on powerpc64-linux with no
> > > regressions.
> > > Ok for mainline?
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-l
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This passed bootstrap and regtesting on powerpc64-linux with no regressions.
> > Ok for mainline?
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Include gnu-user.h in tm_file.
> > * config/rs6000/sysv4.h (C
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> With a recent libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a lot
> of ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
>
> ==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you
> should
>
With a recent libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a lot
of ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you should
either link runtime to your application or manually preload it with
LD_PRELOAD.
Th
Without the patch, I got some coarray failures (for -fcoarray=lib) and
425 other failures. With this patch, the number of failures is down to 269.
I intent to commit the patch to the fortran-devel branch tomorrow,
unless there are objection.
Changes:
* Fix offset for coarray's token field
* E
44 matches
Mail list logo
