View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DietmarSiepmann
Joined: 03 Jun 2013 Posts: 279
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:54 am Post subject: AMD backend failure:instruction offset out of range |
|
|
After moving from ftn95 version 8.61 to 8.62 I observed an AMD backend failure if compiling the following source named backup_failure.for:
Code: |
SUBROUTINE GETINW (TXART,IW,RW,TW)
!+ OK for ftn95 8.61 , error for ftn95 8.62: AMD backend failure:Internal error - instruction offset out of range
INCLUDE 'datlizp.for'
INCLUDE 'p0918in0.for'
INCLUDE 'p0918in1.for'
CHARACTER
* TXART*(*),TW*(*)
INTEGER*4 IW
REAL*4 RW
REAL*8 DW
C DW=1.0 !+ ok
DW=ZW(LKP) !+ bad
RETURN
END
|
The exact error message when using ftn95 8.62 is
Code: |
*** AMD backend failure:Internal error - instruction offset out of range
|
the command for building is
Code: |
ftn95 backup_failure.for /CFPP /DEFINE SALFORD64 1 /ALT_KINDS /FIXED_FORMAT /64
|
The compile succeeds and creates the object file expected if using ftn95 8.61 for compiling.
Moreover if I substitute
by
in file backup_failure.for, then the compile succeeds for both version ftn95 8.61 and 8.62.
Unfortunately I cannot yet reproduce the error without using the 3 include files above the sizes of which are not so small.
I will try to reduce the size of the include files to create a "real" reproducer.
This problem is occuring for many files which have successfully been compiled when using ftn95 8.61.
Regards
Dietmar |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 7924 Location: Salford, UK
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DietmarSiepmann
Joined: 03 Jun 2013 Posts: 279
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paul,
thanks for the link containing version 8.62.1 of ftn95.
It solved the problem addressed above. So I do not have to send you my reproducer (I have been able to strip the include files down to an acceptable size).
Regards
Dietmar |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John-Silver
Joined: 30 Jul 2013 Posts: 1520 Location: Aerospace Valley
|
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
... is this now the 'latest ftn95 executable version Paul, which we should all be taking on board (using), or is it just a single quick-fix for Dietmar ?
John Campbell's recent comment on another seperate post about centralising these 'interim' releases announcements in one place so they're not 'missed' would seem worth re-visiting. _________________ ''Computers (HAL and MARVIN excepted) are incredibly rigid. They question nothing. Especially input data.Human beings are incredibly trusting of computers and don't check input data. Together cocking up even the simplest calculation ... " |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 7924 Location: Salford, UK
|
Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
There is little value in updating to this latest patch unless you encounter the same failure. It only fixes the one issue. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|