From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24072 invoked by alias); 20 Dec 2013 08:36:53 -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 Received: (qmail 23977 invoked by uid 48); 20 Dec 2013 08:36:49 -0000 From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/57904] [4.9 Regression] Bogus(?) "invokes undefined behavior" warning with Fortran's finalization wrapper (gfortran.dg/class_48.f90) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 08:36:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg01917.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57904 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #11) > With the patch in comment 9, gfortran.dg/class_48.f90 no longer fails and I > don't see any regression. The warning for the test in pr58746 comment 2 is > also fixed. But you can always create testcases (in C/C++ etc.) that will hit this warning, so while the FE change is possible, we need to do something either about the optimization passes in between IPA and cunrolli (copyprop change Jeff talks about, perhaps only done for that single pass instance and not others, or all?, guess depending on how expensive it is) or scheduling there another instance of some other cleanup pass, or deferring the warning reporting until some cleanup. For the FE change, I guess most important are benchmark results, doesn't it slow down important benchmarks?