This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Async I/O patch with compilation fix


On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 17:41, Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Christophe,
>
Hi,

> sorry that this took so long, but a holiday followed by a
> business trip seven timezones away can do that :-)
>
Sorry, I am on holidays too, and not back yet :)

> > I applied this patch, and again I still see regressions on
> > armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf
> > --with-cpu cortex-a9
> > --with-fpu neon-fp16
>
> The info that you supplied in the PR indicates some sort of library
> problem exposed by the patch, possibly by including gthr.h.
>
> All Nicolas and I could come up with was to remove the async I/O
> functionality from armeb-* and by xfailing the tests.
>
> This is done by
>
> +#if defined(__GTHREAD_HAS_COND) && defined(__GTHREADS_CXX0X) &&
> !defined(__ARMEB__)
> +#define ASYNC_IO 1
> +#else
> +#define ASYNC_IO 0
> +#endif
>
> If somebody comes up with something more fine-grained for the
> feature test, we can put this in now or later.
>
> Regression-tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (which showed that
> xfail lines in the testsuite aren't wildly inaccurate).
>
> So, I'd appreciate testing. If this passes, this will be
> committed ASAP.
>

I tried this version of the patch, and I'm still seeing the regression
on array_constructor_8.f90.
I didn't try to run the new tests (I only applied the patch part)

I'll try to investigate the PR a bit more when I'm back at the office
(e/o August)

Christophe


> Regards
>
>         Thomas
>


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]