From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-372663-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 25278 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2011 15:16:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 25269 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2011 15:16:23 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 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, 02 Nov 2011 15:16:10 +0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/50960] [OOP] vtables not marked as constant
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 15:16:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-50960-4-a6txvDd3sh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-50960-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-50960-4@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
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: 2011-11/txt/msg00159.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50960

--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-11-02 15:16:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > -         if (gfc_add_flavor (&vtab->attr, FL_VARIABLE, NULL,
> > +         if (gfc_add_flavor (&vtab->attr, FL_PARAMETER, NULL,
> 
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > it is not TREE_READONLY.
> 
> I wonder whether there is a general missed-optimization issue for FL_PARAMETER
> (for the case they are stored as actual data and not just as drop-in number).
> One might need some special handling, but I also do not see "para"
> ("__m_MOD_para:") marked as .rodata for
> 
> module m
>   integer, parameter :: PARA(*) = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
> end module m
> 
> use m
> print *, para
> end

Definitely a missed optimization.  Optimizers will not be able to
propagate constants from that initializer.