From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30703 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2010 11:57:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 30693 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Dec 2010 11:57:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 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; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:57:40 +0000 From: "jb at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/46945] [4.6 Regression] gfortran.dg/unpack_zerosize_1.f90 FAILs with -ftree-vrp -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-fre X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jb at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:57:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg01732.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46945 --- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist 2010-12-15 11:57:28 UTC --- The offending patch is most likely http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02499.html Wrt. the recent changes in the definition of size_t, there is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg02111.html Apart from the change suggested by Jakub in comment #2, is there anything else suspect in those patches?