This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Building a minimal libgfortran for nvptx
- From: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gfortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 09:08:21 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: Building a minimal libgfortran for nvptx
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5458E403 dot 4010408 at codesourcery dot com> <20141104154142 dot GA69954 at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu> <5458F6CE dot 80300 at codesourcery dot com>
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 04:54:54PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/04/2014 04:41 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > It is unclear to me from reading the diff whether this patch
> > cause gfortran on ptx to knowingly violate the fortran standard.
> > If the answer is "yes, this patch causes gfortran on ptx to
> > violate the standard", then the patch is IMHO unacceptable.
>
> I don't have the Fortran standard, but I assume that missing pieces in
> the library would be a violation. However, the alternative is no Fortran
> (library) support at all, which doesn't seem like an improvement. The
> target simply does not allow full language support, even for something
> like C.
>
> Note that the intention is not to support Fortran (or any other
> language) directly targetting ptx code. The only way it's supposed to be
> used is as an accelerator for OpenACC offloading.
>
I see. I get nervous when a patch appears that throws away
a part of the runtime library. There are typically unintended
consequences, which then becomes a support issue.
--
Steve