| Message ID | ydd1v0hi3pj.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 05/02/2011 07:20 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08 execution seems to fail on all 32-bit x86 > targets at -O1 and above. Running it under gdb, I find > > Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted. > [Switching to Thread 1 (LWP 1)] > 0xfed0ff85 in _lwp_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1 > (gdb) where > #0 0xfed0ff85 in _lwp_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1 > #1 0xfed08f49 in thr_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1 > #2 0xfecb8f3d in raise () from /lib/libc.so.1 > #3 0xfec9114d in abort () from /lib/libc.so.1 > #4 0xfef43b2c in _gfortran_abort () at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/libgfortran/intrinsics/abort.c:34 > #5 0x08051821 in check_f_fmt (val=0.995, roundmode=..., w=15, d=2, e=0, _roundmode=1) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:76 > #6 main (val=Could not find the frame base for "main". > ) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:26 > #7 0x0805185b in check_all (val=0.995, w=15, d=2, e=0) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:21 > #8 main (val=0.995, w=15, d=2, e=Could not find the frame base for "main". > ) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:15 > #9 0x08051923 in test_g0fr (argc=1, argv=0x8047a70 "/vol/gcc/obj/regression/trunk/11-gcc/build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/fmt_g0_6.exe") at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:11 > #10 main (argc=1, argv=0x8047a70 "/vol/gcc/obj/regression/trunk/11-gcc/build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/fmt_g0_6.exe") at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:13 > #11 0x08050f03 in _start () > > if (s_g /= s_f) call abort > > (gdb) p s_g > $1 = '' 1.0 '', ' '<repeats 63 times> > (gdb) p s_f > $2 = '' 0.99 '', ' '<repeats 63 times> > > The failure vanishes with -ffloat-store, so I propose the following > patch, tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 with the appropriate runtest > invocation. > > Ok for mainline? > This is OK. We are working on a solution, so maybe it would be better to XFAIL it so that when it does get fixed it will be flagged. It also fails on i686-pc-gnu. Regards, Jerry
Jerry, >> The failure vanishes with -ffloat-store, so I propose the following >> patch, tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 with the appropriate runtest >> invocation. >> >> Ok for mainline? > > This is OK. We are working on a solution, so maybe it would be better to > XFAIL it so that when it does get fixed it will be flagged. It also fails > on i686-pc-gnu. is this a solution for this particular case or for the general need to sometimes use -ffloat-store? In the former case, I'd agree, in the latter it's probably better to consistently use -ffloat-store in the testcases and review those uses once a solution is in place. I also saw the same failure on 32-bit Linux/x86, so the XFAIL would have to be for { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } && ilp32. Let me know what you prefer. Thanks. Rainer
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08 +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08 @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ ! { dg-do run } -! PE48602 Invalid F conversion of G descriptor for values close to powers of 10 +! { dg-options "-ffloat-store" } + ! PR48602 Invalid F conversion of G descriptor for values close to powers of 10 ! Test case provided by Thomas Henlich program test_g0fr
gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08 execution seems to fail on all 32-bit x86 targets at -O1 and above. Running it under gdb, I find Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted. [Switching to Thread 1 (LWP 1)] 0xfed0ff85 in _lwp_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1 (gdb) where #0 0xfed0ff85 in _lwp_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1 #1 0xfed08f49 in thr_kill () from /lib/libc.so.1 #2 0xfecb8f3d in raise () from /lib/libc.so.1 #3 0xfec9114d in abort () from /lib/libc.so.1 #4 0xfef43b2c in _gfortran_abort () at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/libgfortran/intrinsics/abort.c:34 #5 0x08051821 in check_f_fmt (val=0.995, roundmode=..., w=15, d=2, e=0, _roundmode=1) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:76 #6 main (val=Could not find the frame base for "main". ) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:26 #7 0x0805185b in check_all (val=0.995, w=15, d=2, e=0) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:21 #8 main (val=0.995, w=15, d=2, e=Could not find the frame base for "main". ) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:15 #9 0x08051923 in test_g0fr (argc=1, argv=0x8047a70 "/vol/gcc/obj/regression/trunk/11-gcc/build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/fmt_g0_6.exe") at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:11 #10 main (argc=1, argv=0x8047a70 "/vol/gcc/obj/regression/trunk/11-gcc/build/gcc/testsuite/gfortran/fmt_g0_6.exe") at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08:13 #11 0x08050f03 in _start () if (s_g /= s_f) call abort (gdb) p s_g $1 = '' 1.0 '', ' ' <repeats 63 times> (gdb) p s_f $2 = '' 0.99 '', ' ' <repeats 63 times> The failure vanishes with -ffloat-store, so I propose the following patch, tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 with the appropriate runtest invocation. Ok for mainline? Rainer 2011-04-30 Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> * gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_6.f08: Use dg-options "-ffloat-store". Fix typo.