gfortran -g -flto gfortran.dg/gamma_5.f90 fails when calculating gamma. Simplified version below. Without -flto it prints: 1 1.5000000 0.88622695 while with -flto it shows: 1 1.5000000 -0.12078223 integer :: n real :: xs n = 1 xs = n + 0.5 print *, n, xs, gamma(xs) end
Dump (w/ putting "xs" on an extra line): n = 1; xs = (real(kind=4)) n + 5.0e-1; xs = __builtin_tgammaf (xs);
This is because the Fortran frontend has different DECL_FUNCTION_CODE for the same builtins as the middle-end, so they get mixed up (in this case LGAMMA and GAMMA). This needs to be fixed. I also see /* We define these separately as the fortran versions have different semantics (they return an integer type) */ gfc_define_builtin ("__builtin_roundl", mfunc_longdouble[0], BUILT_IN_ROUNDL, "roundl", true); ... ugh. You can't overload existing builtin names with different semantics. The middle-end expects that of gcc/builtins.def. For the above case there exists BUILT_IN_LROUNDL.
(In reply to comment #2) > /* We define these separately as the fortran versions have different > semantics (they return an integer type) */ > gfc_define_builtin ("__builtin_roundl", mfunc_longdouble[0], > > ugh. You can't overload existing builtin names with different semantics. > The middle-end expects that of gcc/builtins.def. For the above case > there exists BUILT_IN_LROUNDL. My impression is that the comment is old and does not apply to "roundl" as the trans-intrinsics.c uses both BUILT_IN_ROUND* and BUILT_IN_LROUND - and given that the "round*" were added much later than the comment according to svn blame. Having said that, I think one should check the other intrinsics in that file (f95-lang.c) and remove then the bogus comment.
Subject: Bug 43040 Author: burnus Date: Tue Feb 16 08:35:05 2010 New Revision: 156796 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156796 Log: 2010-02-16 Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de> PR fortran/43040 * gfortran.h (gfc_isym_id): Rename GFS_ISYM_GAMMA to * GFS_ISYM_TGAMMA. * intrinsic.c (add_functions): Ditto. * iresolve.c (gfc_resolve_gamma): Call tgamma instead of gamma. * mathbuiltins.def: Use TGAMMA instead of GAMMA with "tgamma". Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h trunk/gcc/fortran/intrinsic.c trunk/gcc/fortran/iresolve.c trunk/gcc/fortran/mathbuiltins.def
I think the comment applies only to FLOOR and ROUND - at least when it was first written those were the only ones present. If I read the source code correctly, the ME floor(l,f) is not directly called but instead the following is generated: FLOOR(x) = INT(x) <= x ? INT(x) : INT(x) - 1 cf. trans-intrinsic.c. I also believe that ROUND [(l)round(l,f)] is properly handled, which means that the PR could be closed. However, I leave it open for someone else to cross check.
I'm currently looking at math builtins for __float128 support, so I'll check that.
Subject: Bug 43040 Author: fxcoudert Date: Wed Jun 9 10:17:56 2010 New Revision: 160459 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160459 Log: PR fortran/43040 * f95-lang.c (gfc_init_builtin_functions): Remove comment. Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c
Checked that it is not an issue.