From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-332094-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 26311 invoked by alias); 26 Sep 2010 03:39:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 26300 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Sep 2010 03:39:24 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,MISSING_MID,TW_JV
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:39:19 +0000
From: "jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions]  Numerous test-suite failures
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
In-Reply-To: <bug-45793-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-45793-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:42:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg02818.txt.bz2
Message-ID: <20100926104200.UdtvLE2qGtfwBFKkA0SFPnONhdjXVD5dSX0agG37daM@z>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793

--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-09-26 03:39:17 UTC ---
This patch untested gets rid of the valgrind error I was seeing.

Index: module.c
===================================================================
--- module.c    (revision 164621)
+++ module.c    (working copy)
@@ -5313,7 +5313,6 @@ create_int_parameter_array (const char *name, int
 {
   gfc_symtree *tmp_symtree;
   gfc_symbol *sym;
-  gfc_expr *e;

   tmp_symtree = gfc_find_symtree (gfc_current_ns->sym_root, name);
   if (tmp_symtree != NULL)
@@ -5342,8 +5341,8 @@ create_int_parameter_array (const char *name, int
   sym->as->upper[0] = gfc_get_int_expr (gfc_default_integer_kind, NULL, size); 

   sym->value = value;
-  e->shape = gfc_get_shape (1);
-  mpz_init_set_ui (e->shape[0], size);
+  sym->value->shape = gfc_get_shape (1);
+  mpz_init_set_ui (sym->value->shape[0], size);
 }

Can someone familiar with module.c see if this makes sense for the intended
purpose.  I will start regression testing.