Re: *PING* [PATCH 0/4] Use pointer arithmetic for array references [PR102043]

[Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus <stefansf@linux.ibm.com>]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 04:40:33PM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > From: Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> > Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 15:59:45 +0200
> 
> > Hi Mikael,
> > 
> > > Ping for the four patches starting at 
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057759.html :
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057757.html
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057760.html
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057758.html
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057761.html
> > > 
> > > Richi accepted the general direction and the middle-end interaction.
> > > I need a fortran frontend ack as well.
> > 
> > Looks good to me.
> > 
> > Thanks a lot for taking this on! This would have been a serious
> > regression if released with gcc 12.
> > 
> > Best regards
> > 
> > 	Thomas
> 
> These, or specifically r12-8227-g89ca0fffa48b79, "fortran:
> Pre-evaluate string pointers. [PR102043]" have further
> exposed (the issue existed before but now fails for more
> platforms) PR78054 "gfortran.dg/pr70673.f90 FAILs at -O0",
> at least for cris-elf and apparently also
> s390x-ibm-linux-gnu.
> 
> In the PR it is mentioned that running the test through
> valgrind shows invalid accesses also on x86_64-linux-gnu.
> Could it be that the test-case is invalid and has undefined
> behavior?  I don't know fortran so I can't tell.
> 
> That exact commit causing a regression for s390x is somewhat
> an assumption based on posted date and testresults, as the
> s390x results don't include a git version.  (@Stefansf: I'm
> referring to
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2022-April/760060.html
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2022-April/760137.html
> Perhaps that tester isn't using the contrib/gcc_update and
> contrib/test_summary scripts, thus no LAST_UPDATED
> included?)

Indeed the reports don't include a git commit id.  We are using both
scripts.  However, since the git repository is setup differently in our
case, we had been using `gcc_update --touch` only.  Thus the files
LAST_UPDATED as well as gcc/REVISION were not created.  I changed that
such that both are created, now.  Thanks for letting me know!

Cheers,
Stefan