From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id EA7113858284; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:34:06 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org EA7113858284 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1661373246; bh=6MrfNtYtDv5Zhn/hklOPpnEhtjQv5cKehJVsdv3hgcc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=xgVxEc2abwA/BiV3j6hoalNJSfShyKw3sqTjg4tiKMh7seUbVzjnph2DADBIhatAq J1wBGtqDGouxbw1ZzBBvcu4OTQaeWu7zEcrtzAlfnKz8D5mAQtW5ZPsednmglKNqCu 3Uk2Xdsr6lwwMv+uyQNEKQFRXoM1DeH6rko3onR4= From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/105012] [12/13 Regression] wrf from SPECCPU2017 ICEs during LTO linking since r12-7692-g8db155ddf8cec9 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:34:06 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.3 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105012 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #18 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Tentative patch, regtests cleanly but otherwise untested: diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc index 850007fd2e1..0a1520e95ba 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc @@ -6503,8 +6503,19 @@ gfc_conv_procedure_call (gfc_se * se, gfc_symbol * s= ym, else { bool add_clobber; - add_clobber =3D fsym && fsym->attr.intent =3D=3D INTE= NT_OUT - && !fsym->attr.allocatable && !fsym->attr.pointer + gfc_symbol *dsym =3D fsym; + gfc_dummy_arg *dummy; + + /* Use associated dummy as fallback for formal + argument if there is no explicit interface. */ + if (dsym =3D=3D NULL + && (dummy =3D arg->associated_dummy) + && dummy->intrinsicness =3D=3D GFC_NON_INTRINSIC_DUMMY_ARG + && dummy->u.non_intrinsic->sym) + dsym =3D dummy->u.non_intrinsic->sym; + + add_clobber =3D dsym && dsym->attr.intent =3D=3D INTE= NT_OUT + && !dsym->attr.allocatable && !dsym->attr.pointer && e->symtree && e->symtree->n.sym && !e->symtree->n.sym->attr.dimension && !e->symtree->n.sym->attr.pointer Does this fix the remaining issue? What is the best way to write a testcase that checks that the clobber is inserted properly?=