Re: [PATCH 22/22] Coarray caf_shmem final patch set

Pushed, thankypu all for your support, reviews, testing, and patience.

Best regards,

Jerry

$ git pull --rebase
remote: Enumerating objects: 613, done.
remote: Counting objects: 100% (605/605), done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (298/298), done.
remote: Total 299 (delta 245), reused 0 (delta 0), pack-reused 0
Receiving objects: 100% (299/299), 117.89 KiB | 1.21 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (245/245), completed with 134 local objects.
 From git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc
    e0b70284cfa..13a53660180  master          -> origin/master
    c59dcc612d7..441b4847267  releases/gcc-13 -> origin/releases/gcc-13
    f046752d2e9..c80b51b93a1  releases/gcc-14 -> origin/releases/gcc-14
    0cba8001546..4886dd899bb  releases/gcc-15 -> origin/releases/gcc-15
    e0b70284cfa..13a53660180  trunk           -> origin/trunk
Successfully rebased and updated refs/heads/master.
$ git push
Enumerating objects: 270, done.
Counting objects: 100% (270/270), done.
Delta compression using up to 16 threads
Compressing objects: 100% (204/204), done.
Writing objects: 100% (225/225), 121.96 KiB | 8.13 MiB/s, done.
Total 225 (delta 168), reused 46 (delta 21), pack-reused 0 (from 0)
remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (168/168), completed with 39 local objects.
To ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
    13a53660180..132139c00a8  master -> master


On 2/25/26 11:38 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Hi Jerry and Andre,
> 
> Thank you for this splendid effort. The patch makes coarray fortran so 
> accessible that even I have had a go! As far as I can tell, all the F2018 
> extensions work as advertised.
> 
> The ease of use is important in an era, in which even relatively low cost 
> systems such as mine can have 20 CPUs, and will enable an introduction to coarrays.
> 
> As you are aware, I cannot do anything to help at present. However, once back I 
> will continue stress testing and will help with documentation, especially on the 
> wiki.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2026, 09:53 Jerry D, <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>     On 2/25/26 5:53 AM, Toon Moene wrote:
>      > On 2/24/26 23:06, Toon Moene wrote:
>      >
>      >> On 2/24/26 23:03, Jerry D wrote:
>      >>
>      >>> Ref: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2026-February/063551.html
>     <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2026-February/063551.html>
>      >>>
>      >>> See attached.
>      >>>
>      >>> Awaiting approval.
>      >>>
>      >>> This is the last one.
>      >>
>      >> Thanks, Jerry for this arduous work. I received all of them, in order, so I
>      >> will work to test them tomorrow.
>      >
>      > The test completed:
>      >
>      > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2026-February/870199.html
>     <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2026-February/870199.html>
>      >
>      > One small patch difference:
>      >
>      > patching file gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
>      > Hunk #1 succeeded at 14271 (offset 7 lines).
>      >
>      > My "random-weather" test program functions as previously.
>      >
>      > The "locks" test program:
>      >
>      > (export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=~/compilers/install/gcc/lib64:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH;
>     time ./
>      > a.out)
>      >   Expected:           64 Found:           64
>      >   Expected:          640 Found:          640
>      >   Expected:         6400 Found:         6400
>      >   Expected:        64000 Found:        64000
>      >   Expected:       640000 Found:       640000
>      >   Expected:      6400000 Found:      6400000
>      >
>      > real    0m3.349s
>      > user    0m4.431s
>      > sys    3m17.081s
>      >
>      > Looks great, all together !
>      >
>      > Kind regards,
>      >
> 
>     I will push this tomorrow morning if no RM objections.
> 
>     Best regards to all,
> 
>     Jerry
>