| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
with gfortran.
"Error in DLA_GBAMV.f line 226: forrtl: severe (408): fort: (2): Subscript #1 of the array AB has value 2 which is greater than the upper bound of 1"
Reported in http://icl.cs.utk.edu/trac/lapack-dev/ticket/45
|
|
Bug in RFP routines xTFSM for N=1 independently reported by Jason and Julie.
============================================================================
See Jason's email DEC/27/2009: "Similar problem in xTFSM".
Jason used gfortran with -fbounds-check and got:
> At line 328 of file stfsm.f
> Fortran runtime error: Array reference out of bounds for array 'b', upper bound of dimension 1 exceeded (1 > 0)
Julie also observed the bug with MS Visual Studio.
See ticket http://icl.cs.utk.edu/trac/lapack-dev/ticket/46
The problem is the following. Sometimes in the RFP routines, we
call routines like for example
DGEMM ( M, N, K, ... A( I, J), ...)
where M or N is 0 and A( I, J ) is out-of-bound. The rationale was since M or
N is 0, DGEMM simply exits without doing anything, therefore the out-of-bound
A(I,J) is not an issue. Well, this is not Fortran correct.
In this commit, I have fix the problem for xTFSM. This is a fix. This is not
rocket-science and one can certainly do something more elegant ... This bug is
blocking Julie from porting on Windows so the matter was urgent.
Now RFP + ( gfortan -fbounds-check ) works fine.
TODO: find a cleaner way to fix this,
TODO: Unfortunately I believe there are other bugs like this one in other RFP
routines, always when N=1. See for example xPFTRF. I do not understand why the
TESTING with gfortran -fbounds-check do not trigger an error though ...
|
|
|
|
https://jason@icl.cs.utk.edu/svn/lapack-dev/lapack/branches/SC08-release
........
r609 | julie | 2008-12-16 17:17:52 -0500 (Tue, 16 Dec 2008) | 1 line
Polish routines to fit the LAPACK framework and allow manpages generation
........
r610 | langou | 2008-12-19 12:12:38 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 30 lines
bug reported on the forum
https://icl.cs.utk.edu/lapack-forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=854
the complete thread is available at
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/635192e11beadb93#
Tobias Burnus also sent us an email:
> Hello,
>
> this was reported at
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/635192e11beadb93#
>
> The problem is the line 47:
>
> 47: IF( M.EQ.0 .OR. A(M, 1).NE.ZERO .OR. A(M, N).NE.ZERO ) THEN
>
> If M == 0 the one accesses A(0,1) which is invalid as the lower bound is 1
> and not 0.
>
> Note: Contrary to C there is no left-to-right evaluation of expressions in
> Fortran; the order is left to the compiler. One might assume that a smart
> compiler does not evaluate "A(M,1)" if "M==0", however, there is nothing in
> the standard guarantees this.
>
> If bounds checks are turned on (see post at the URL above), gfortran aborts
> with an out-of-bounds error.
........
r611 | julie | 2008-12-19 15:00:58 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 5 lines
Modify the formatting of the comments.
Replace Note and Notes section by Further Details
This allow the manpages to be generated corectly.
........
r612 | julie | 2008-12-19 16:29:21 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 3 lines
Reformat the xblas routines comments to be able to generate the manpages
........
r613 | julie | 2008-12-19 16:30:31 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 1 line
Update version number
........
r614 | jason | 2008-12-27 09:44:45 -0500 (Sat, 27 Dec 2008) | 13 lines
Fix non-short-circuited tests in ILAxL{C,R}.
Fortran doesn't short-circuit logical operators, so the check that the leading
dimension /= 0 may not prevent indexing into a 0-length array.
Reported by "hes selex" in
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/635192e11beadb93
and forwarded to the LAPACK maintainers by Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>.
Chalk up more bugs found by gfortran's diagnostics!
Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu>
Cc: Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
........
|
|
|
|
|
