From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18635 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2014 08:15:02 -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 17868 invoked by uid 48); 14 Mar 2014 08:14:55 -0000 From: "roger.ferrer at bsc dot es" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/60522] New: WHERE construct causes an ICE in gfc_trans_where_2 Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:15:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: roger.ferrer at bsc dot es X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter Message-ID: 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 X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg01130.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D60522 Bug ID: 60522 Summary: WHERE construct causes an ICE in gfc_trans_where_2 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: roger.ferrer at bsc dot es Hi, the following code ! -- test.f90 subroutine foo(a, b) implicit none integer, dimension(:), intent(inout) :: a integer, dimension(:), intent(in) :: b where (b(:) > 0) a(lbound(a, 1):ubound(a, 1)) =3D b(lbound(b, 1):ubound(b, 1)) * b(lbo= und(b, 1):ubound(b, 1)) end where end subroutine foo ! -- end of test.f90 causes an ICE if optimization is enabled: $ gfortran -c test.f90 -O test.f90: In function =E2=80=98foo=E2=80=99: test.f90:6:0: internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_where_2, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:4550 where (B(:) > 0) ^ Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See for instructions. The problem goes away if the assignment is of the (equivalent) form: a(:) =3D b(:) * b(:) or a =3D b * b or if optimization is disabled. Kind regards, >>From gcc-bugs-return-446262-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri Mar 14 08:18:32 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 21874 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2014 08:18:32 -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 Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 21849 invoked by uid 48); 14 Mar 2014 08:18:28 -0000 From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/60521] std::lock_guard ignores adopt_lock strategy Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:18:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.3 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed bug_severity 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: 2014-03/txt/msg01131.txt.bz2 Content-length: 735 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60521 Jonathan Wakely changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed| |2014-03-14 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Severity|blocker |normal --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Sergei Turchanov from comment #0) > lock_guard(mutex_type& __m, adopt_lock_t) : _M_device(__m) > { } // calling thread owns mutex Where in that code do you think it locks the mutex?