[Bug fortran/65894] New: severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[Bug fortran/65894] New: severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

            Bug ID: 65894
           Summary: severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
           Product: gcc
           Version: 6.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
  Target Milestone: ---

Between the commits r222305 and r222439 a severe regression has been
introducing segfaults in our code:
http://whizard.hepforge.org/versions/unofficial/whizard-2.2.6_alpha-20150426.tar.gz
A tarball can be accessed here, which can be compiled with 
./configure FC=<gcc60> F77=<gcc60> --disable-ocaml
make
In build/tests
the test beams.run e.g. (and ca. 170 others) triggers the runtime error. Up to
now, I was not able to produce a smaller test case. 
Do make beams.run in tests, and then
./beams.run.

[Bug fortran/65894] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #1 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Ok, here is a bit shorter test case, untar the attached file,
do ./make.
This produces an executable seg_prod. With r222305 I get the desired result:
$ ./seg_prod 
| ============================================================================
| Running self-test: beams
| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Running test: beam_1 ... success.
Running test: beam_2 ... success.
Running test: beam_3 ... success.
with r222439 I get:
$ ./seg_prod 
| ============================================================================
| Running self-test: beams
| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Running test: beam_1
Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference.

Backtrace for this error:
#0  0x7F4C166B4B57
#1  0x7F4C166B3D50
#2  0x7F4C15C9322F
#3  0x447141 in __model_data_MOD_field_data_get_pdg
#4  0x43B51D in __model_data_MOD_model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg
#5  0x45C647 in __flavors_MOD_flavor_init0_model
#6  0x4D5FAF in __beams_MOD_beam_1 at beams.f90:0
#7  0x40C775 in __unit_tests_MOD_test
#8  0x4D7978 in __beams_MOD_beam_test
#9  0x4E17A0 in MAIN__ at whizard_test.f90:0
Segmentation fault
>From gcc-bugs-return-484671-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Apr 26 15:04:15 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484671-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30531 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2015 15:04:14 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30501 invoked by uid 48); 26 Apr 2015 15:04:11 -0000
From: "juergen.reuter at desy dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/65894] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:04:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-65894-4-3SUx6Fx0jp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02223.txt.bz2
Content-length: 272

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Created attachment 35401
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35401&action=edit
Code that triggers the segmentation fault.
>From gcc-bugs-return-484672-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Apr 26 15:31:08 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484672-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 79832 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2015 15:31:07 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 79786 invoked by uid 48); 26 Apr 2015 15:31:04 -0000
From: "trippels at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/65894] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:31:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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 cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-65894-4-mZeQIUggt1@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02224.txt.bz2
Content-length: 658

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide894

Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-04-26
                 CC|                            |trippels at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with r222361.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |6.0
            Summary|severe regression in        |[6 Regression] severe
                   |gfortran 6.0.0              |regression in gfortran
                   |                            |6.0.0

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[vehre at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looks like this is my patch's fault. I will investigate and report back.

Because this is on trunk and seems to not make gfortran completely unusable, I
would like not to withdraw the commit, but to fix the issue in a later patch.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #5 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Here is a reduced test case (where iso_varying_string.f90 is the standard
module with 1 or 2 modifications by us). As this is at the core of our program,
we do rely on a timely fix in order to further use and test gfortran 6.0.



module model_data
  use iso_varying_string, string_t => varying_string

  implicit none
  private

  public :: field_data_t
  public :: model_data_t

  type :: field_data_t
     private
     integer :: pdg = 0
     type(string_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: name
   contains
     procedure :: init => field_data_init
     procedure :: get_pdg => field_data_get_pdg
  end type field_data_t

  type :: model_data_t
     private
     type(string_t) :: name
     type(field_data_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: field
   contains
     generic :: init => model_data_init
     procedure, private :: model_data_init
     generic :: get_pdg => &
          model_data_get_field_pdg_index
     procedure, private :: model_data_get_field_pdg_index
     generic :: get_field_ptr => &
          model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg
     procedure, private :: model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg
     procedure :: get_field_ptr_by_index => model_data_get_field_ptr_index
     procedure :: init_sm_test => model_data_init_sm_test
  end type model_data_t


contains

  subroutine field_data_init (prt, pdg)
    class(field_data_t), intent(out) :: prt
    integer, intent(in) :: pdg
    prt%pdg = pdg
  end subroutine field_data_init

  elemental function field_data_get_pdg (prt) result (pdg)
    integer :: pdg
    class(field_data_t), intent(in) :: prt
    pdg = prt%pdg
  end function field_data_get_pdg

  subroutine model_data_init (model, name, &
       n_field)
    class(model_data_t), intent(out) :: model
    type(string_t), intent(in) :: name
    integer, intent(in) :: n_field
    model%name = name
    allocate (model%field (n_field))
  end subroutine model_data_init

  function model_data_get_field_pdg_index (model, i) result (pdg)
    class(model_data_t), intent(in) :: model
    integer, intent(in) :: i
    integer :: pdg
    pdg = model%field(i)%get_pdg ()
  end function model_data_get_field_pdg_index

  function model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg (model, pdg, check) result (ptr)
    class(model_data_t), intent(in), target :: model
    integer, intent(in) :: pdg
    logical, intent(in), optional :: check
    type(field_data_t), pointer :: ptr
    integer :: i, pdg_abs
    if (pdg == 0) then
       ptr => null ()
       return
    end if
    pdg_abs = abs (pdg)
    do i = 1, size (model%field)
       if (model%field(i)%get_pdg () == pdg_abs) then
          ptr => model%field(i)
          return
       end if
    end do
    ptr => null ()
  end function model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg

  function model_data_get_field_ptr_index (model, i) result (ptr)
    class(model_data_t), intent(in), target :: model
    integer, intent(in) :: i
    type(field_data_t), pointer :: ptr
    ptr => model%field(i)
  end function model_data_get_field_ptr_index

  subroutine model_data_init_sm_test (model)
    class(model_data_t), intent(out) :: model
    type(field_data_t), pointer :: field
    integer, parameter :: n_field = 19
    call model%init (var_str ("SM_test"), &
         n_field)
    field => model%get_field_ptr_by_index (1)
    call field%init (1)
  end subroutine model_data_init_sm_test

end module model_data


module flavors
  use model_data

  implicit none
  private

  public :: flavor_t

  type :: flavor_t
     private
     integer :: f = 0
     type(field_data_t), pointer :: field_data => null ()
   contains
     generic :: init => &
          flavor_init0_model
     procedure, private :: flavor_init0_model
  end type flavor_t

contains

  impure elemental subroutine flavor_init0_model (flv, f, model)
    class(flavor_t), intent(inout) :: flv
    integer, intent(in) :: f
    class(model_data_t), intent(in), target :: model
    flv%f = f
    flv%field_data => model%get_field_ptr (f, check=.true.)
  end subroutine flavor_init0_model
end module flavors

module beams
  use model_data
  use flavors
  implicit none
  private
  public :: beam_1
contains
  subroutine beam_1 (u)
    integer, intent(in) :: u
    type(flavor_t), dimension(2) :: flv
    real, dimension(2) :: pol_f
    type(model_data_t), target :: model
    call model%init_sm_test ()   
    call flv%init ([1,-1], model)
    pol_f(1) = 0.5
  end subroutine beam_1
end module beams

program main
  use beams
  call beam_1 (6)
end program main
>From gcc-bugs-return-484704-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Apr 27 09:41:10 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484704-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 59853 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2015 09:41:09 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 59576 invoked by uid 48); 27 Apr 2015 09:41:05 -0000
From: "juergen.reuter at desy dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 09:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: juergen.reuter at desy dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-65894-4-JOZwnUCQwE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02256.txt.bz2
Content-length: 246

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #6 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Created attachment 35403
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35403&action=edit
Auxiliary module
>From gcc-bugs-return-484706-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Apr 27 09:41:55 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484706-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 61619 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2015 09:41:55 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 61537 invoked by uid 48); 27 Apr 2015 09:41:51 -0000
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/65886] [5/6 Regression] Copy reloc in PIE incompatible with DSO created by -Wl,-Bsymbolic
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 09:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 5.2
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-65886-4-ErkVaHV3tM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65886-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65886-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02258.txt.bz2
Content-length: 633

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide886

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
First of all, why is this filed as a GCC bug?  And what is PIE specific on the
issue?  I mean, if -Bsymbolic doesn't cope well with like copy relocations,
then
the testcase doesn't work on most targets when the binary is normal executable
rather than PIE.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #7 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Created attachment 35404
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35404&action=edit
Code that triggers the segmentation fault.
>From gcc-bugs-return-484707-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Apr 27 09:46:08 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484707-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 71721 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2015 09:46:08 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 71678 invoked by uid 48); 27 Apr 2015 09:46:04 -0000
From: "ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/65836] [6 Regression] gnat fails to build on aarch64-linux-gnu
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 09:46:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build, ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-65836-4-ii7EFKhdHm@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65836-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65836-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02259.txt.bz2
Content-length: 441

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide836

ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So bootstrap now succeeds. Presumably fixed by Tom?

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[vehre at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #8 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35407
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35407&action=edit
A first patch.

With the attached patch your small test case and the testsuite runs w/o
segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok with the patch.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> With the attached patch your small test case and the test suite runs
> w/o segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok
> with the patch.

Confirmed. The bigger test in comment 2 runs without segfault also. However I
get an ICE when compiling the full package at
http://whizard.hepforge.org/versions/unofficial/whizard-2.2.6_alpha-20150426.tar.gz

libtool: compile:  gfc -I../basics -I../utilities -I../testing -I../system
-I../combinatorics -I../expr_base -I../physics -g -O2 -c evaluators.f90 
-fno-common -o .libs/evaluators.o
evaluators.f90:897:0:

                  .or. qn_mask_rest
 1
internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:9203

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #10 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> > With the attached patch your small test case and the test suite runs
> > w/o segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok
> > with the patch.
> 
> Confirmed. The bigger test in comment 2 runs without segfault also. However
> I get an ICE when compiling the full package at
> http://whizard.hepforge.org/versions/unofficial/whizard-2.2.6_alpha-20150426.
> tar.gz
> 
> libtool: compile:  gfc -I../basics -I../utilities -I../testing -I../system
> -I../combinatorics -I../expr_base -I../physics -g -O2 -c evaluators.f90 
> -fno-common -o .libs/evaluators.o
> evaluators.f90:897:0:
> 
>                   .or. qn_mask_rest
>  1
> internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at
> fortran/trans-expr.c:9203


I confirm this ICE with the patch and will provide a smaller test case soon.
>From gcc-bugs-return-484838-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Apr 28 12:17:26 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484838-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 33287 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2015 12:17:26 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 33245 invoked by uid 48); 28 Apr 2015 12:17:22 -0000
From: "paul at xk7 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libgcc/62097] mipsel-sde-elf build fails on OS X 10.7 host
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 12:17:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libgcc
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: paul at xk7 dot net
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-62097-4-DyhEh7UukU@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-62097-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-62097-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02390.txt.bz2
Content-length: 711

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idb097

Paul Waring <paul at xk7 dot net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |paul at xk7 dot net

--- Comment #3 from Paul Waring <paul at xk7 dot net> ---
I can confirm the same issue occurs for me on OS X  10.10 (Yosemite) and the
following:

GCC: 4.9.2
binutils: 2.25
MPFR: 3.1.2
MPC: 1.0.3
GMP: 6.0.0a
Newlib: 2.2.0-1

clang --version
Apple LLVM version 6.1.0 (clang-602.0.49) (based on LLVM 3.6.0svn)
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin14.3.0
Thread model: posix

Is there anything I can do to help fix this bug?

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #11 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Here is the small test case for the ICE with the patch provided Andre
Vehreschild:

gfortran -c evaluators.f90
evaluators.f90:40:0:

             .or. qn_mask_rest
 1
internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:9187

evaluators.f90:40:0: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6
gfortran: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6 (program f951)

This is the code:

module evaluators
  implicit none
  private
  type :: quantum_numbers_mask_t
   contains
     generic :: operator(.or.) => quantum_numbers_mask_or
     procedure, private :: quantum_numbers_mask_or
  end type quantum_numbers_mask_t

  type :: index_map_t
     integer, dimension(:), allocatable :: entry
  end type index_map_t
  type :: prt_mask_t
     logical, dimension(:), allocatable :: entry
  end type prt_mask_t
  type :: qn_mask_array_t
     type(quantum_numbers_mask_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: mask
  end type qn_mask_array_t

contains
  elemental function quantum_numbers_mask_or (mask1, mask2) result (mask)
    type(quantum_numbers_mask_t) :: mask
    class(quantum_numbers_mask_t), intent(in) :: mask1, mask2
  end function quantum_numbers_mask_or

  subroutine make_product_interaction &
      (prt_is_connected, qn_mask_in, qn_mask_rest)
    type(prt_mask_t), dimension(2), intent(in) :: prt_is_connected
    type(qn_mask_array_t), dimension(2), intent(in) :: qn_mask_in
    type(quantum_numbers_mask_t), intent(in) :: qn_mask_rest
    type(index_map_t), dimension(2) :: prt_index_in
    integer :: i
    type(quantum_numbers_mask_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: qn_mask
    allocate (qn_mask (2))
    do i = 1, 2
       qn_mask(prt_index_in(i)%entry) = &
            pack (qn_mask_in(i)%mask, prt_is_connected(i)%entry) &
            .or. qn_mask_rest
    end do
  end subroutine make_product_interaction
end module evaluators
>From gcc-bugs-return-484874-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Apr 28 16:15:03 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-484874-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 122022 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2015 16:15:03 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 121912 invoked by uid 48); 28 Apr 2015 16:14:59 -0000
From: "trippels at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:15:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: web
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: LpSolit at netscape dot net
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-64968-4-LDazd6q8EA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64968-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64968-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-04/txt/msg02426.txt.bz2
Content-length: 358

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idd968

--- Comment #18 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
One thing I've noticed is that the emails to gcc-bugs now use the local time
of the user. So the sorting isn't correct anymore if people from different
time zones comment.
(The same issue also happens on sourceware.org/bugzilla/)

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[vehre at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #35407|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #12 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35464
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35464&action=edit
Follow-up patch fixing latest regression.

With this patch all code samples and the code in the tar-archive compile and
execute well. This patch will need most of my previous patches. The total set
of all of my patches is available on the gitmirror in the branch
vehre/head_cosmo

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #13 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
I will give it a try as soon as possible. Any idea how long propagation into
the trunk might last?
>From gcc-bugs-return-485560-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue May 05 17:47:07 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485560-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44571 invoked by alias); 5 May 2015 17:47:06 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 44497 invoked by uid 55); 5 May 2015 17:47:03 -0000
From: "ian at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug go/66016] Accessing nil Func's name results in crash
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 17:47:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: go
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ian at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ian at airs dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66016-4-wR2AaqToUA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66016-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66016-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00400.txt.bz2
Content-length: 421

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf016

--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org <ian at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue May  5 17:46:31 2015
New Revision: 222820

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev"2820&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
        PR go/66016
runtime: Don't crash in Func.Name if the Func is nil.

Related to Go issue 10696

Modified:
    branches/gcc-5-branch/libgo/runtime/go-caller.c

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[vehre at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #14 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That solely depends on the availability of reviews. At the moment getting a
review is quite difficult.

Btw, when you can use docker, then there is docker image available at:

https://registry.hub.docker.com/u/cmbant/docker-gcc-build/

But this also needs to compile first. Check the "Build Details" tab, whether it
succeeded. I do not maintain this docker file, just for info.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Created attachment 35464 [details]
> Follow-up patch fixing latest regression.
>
> With this patch all code samples and the code in the tar-archive compile
> and execute well. This patch will need most of my previous patches. The total
> set of all of my patches is available on the gitmirror in the branch
> vehre/head_cosmo

With this patch I still get the ICE when compiling the file evaluators.f90.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[vehre at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |WAITING

--- Comment #16 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch submitted at:

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00025.html

This patch also fixes the issue in comment #15.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #17 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #16)
> Patch submitted at:
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00025.html
> 
> This patch also fixes the issue in comment #15.

First of all, thanks for the efforts. Does this also fix the ICE in #11?
>From gcc-bugs-return-485723-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu May 07 10:00:41 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485723-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 40532 invoked by alias); 7 May 2015 10:00:41 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 40477 invoked by uid 48); 7 May 2015 10:00:36 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug bootstrap/66038] SIGSEGV at stage 2 build/genmatch --gimple ../../gcc-5.1.0/gcc/match.pd
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 10:00:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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: cf_gcctarget bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc cf_gcchost everconfirmed cf_gccbuild
Message-ID: <bug-66038-4-hMrvP6O7vV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66038-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66038-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00563.txt.bz2
Content-length: 905

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf038

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Target|                            |powerpc-darwin
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-05-07
                 CC|                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
               Host|                            |powerpc-darwin
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
              Build|                            |powerpc-darwin

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think you may run into a host compiler issue?  (ISTR a similar bug for
darwin)

What is your host compiler?  I suppose ppc-darwin still uses gcc 4.2.x, right?

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[vehre at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #18 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, it also fixes the ICE in #11. The code example is part of the regression
test added. I hope you don't mind. Most parts of the regression test added base
on your reported issues.

Additionally the whizard code mentioned in #1 is compiling and running again.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #19 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Of course, we are fine (or even happy) if you take our code examples for your
regression tests.
>From gcc-bugs-return-485727-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu May 07 10:30:11 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485727-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 88827 invoked by alias); 7 May 2015 10:30:11 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 88752 invoked by uid 48); 7 May 2015 10:30:06 -0000
From: "gcc at mattwhitlock dot name" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/192] String literals don't obey -fdata-sections
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 10:30:00 -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: 2.95.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: gcc at mattwhitlock dot name
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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:
Message-ID: <bug-192-4-2pWHPPfO8t@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-192-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-192-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00567.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1885

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id\x192

--- Comment #15 from Matt Whitlock <gcc at mattwhitlock dot name> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> This doesn't really look like a good idea to me.  Instead, perhaps ld's
> --gc-sections or new special option should just remove unused string
> literals from mergeable sections.

I believe (I've read, but I haven't verified) that Gold already does this.

> With your patch, I bet you lose e.g. all tail merging.

Tail merging still works fine.

> Consider:
> const char *used1 () { return "foo bar baz blah blah"; }
> in one TU and
> const char *used2 () { return "bar baz blah blah"; }
> in another.

Okay, I'll use your example.

$ echo 'const char *used1 () { return "foo bar baz blah blah"; }' > tu1.c
$ echo 'const char *used2 () { return "bar baz blah blah"; }' > tu2.c
$ cat > main.c <<EOF
extern const char * used1(), * used2();
int main() { puts(used1()); puts(used2()); return 0; }
EOF

$ gcc -c -fdata-sections -fmerge-constants -o tu1.o tu1.c
$ gcc -c -fdata-sections -fmerge-constants -o tu2.o tu2.c
$ gcc -c -fdata-sections -fmerge-constants -o main.o main.c

$ objdump -s tu1.o tu2.o | fgrep -A2 .rodata
Contents of section .rodata.str1.1.b4d3fd7d:
 0000 666f6f20 62617220 62617a20 626c6168  foo bar baz blah
 0010 20626c61 6800                         blah.
--
Contents of section .rodata.str1.1.a07ea0c2:
 0000 62617220 62617a20 626c6168 20626c61  bar baz blah bla
 0010 6800                                 h.

$ gcc -Wl,--gc-sections -o proof main.o tu1.o tu2.o

$ ./proof
foo bar baz blah blah
bar baz blah blah

$ objdump -s proof | fgrep -A2 .rodata
Contents of section .rodata:
 40061d 666f6f20 62617220 62617a20 626c6168  foo bar baz blah
 40062d 20626c61 6800                         blah.

As you can see, tail merging across translation units works fine.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #21 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
No this is not expected. There seems to be another problem inside gfortran
6.0.0 trunk. I cannot test things before tomorrow/weekend.
>From gcc-bugs-return-485732-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu May 07 12:17:48 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485732-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 125731 invoked by alias); 7 May 2015 12:17:48 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 125620 invoked by uid 48); 7 May 2015 12:17:44 -0000
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/66041] [6 Regression] Matmul ICE
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 12:17:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66041-4-R7VAc3xVvX@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66041-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66041-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00572.txt.bz2
Content-length: 161

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf041

--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Workaround: Use -finline-matmul-limit=0.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #22 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> No this is not expected. There seems to be another problem inside
> gfortran 6.0.0 trunk. I cannot test things before tomorrow/weekend.

I will try with a tree with less patches.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #23 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
That would be cool. If you have OCaml installed (version 3.12 or newer, and as
a French you couldn't complain about that^^) you could run a lot more from the
test suite.
>From gcc-bugs-return-485735-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu May 07 12:34:58 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485735-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 97517 invoked by alias); 7 May 2015 12:34:58 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 97474 invoked by uid 48); 7 May 2015 12:34:54 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 12:34:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-65894-4-gQR2oGxQyF@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-65894-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00575.txt.bz2
Content-length: 376

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ide894

--- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> That would be cool. If you have OCaml installed (version 3.12 or newer,
> and as a French you couldn't complain about that^^) you could run a lot more
> from the test suite.

I have

The OCaml toplevel, version 4.02.1

What should I do to use it?

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #25 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Just do the configuration without the --disable-ocaml flag (the default is 
that OCaml is enabled). The configure should show then something like that
(Ocamlweb is not needed):
configure: --------------------------------------------------------------
configure: --- Objective Caml checks ---
configure: 
checking for ocaml... /usr/local/bin/ocaml
checking for ocamlc... /usr/local/bin/ocamlc
OCaml version is 4.02.1
OCaml library path is /usr/local/lib/ocaml
checking for ocamlopt... /usr/local/bin/ocamlopt
checking for ocamlc.opt... /usr/local/bin/ocamlc.opt
checking for ocamlopt.opt... /usr/local/bin/ocamlopt.opt
checking for ocamldep... /usr/local/bin/ocamldep
checking for ocamlmktop... /usr/local/bin/ocamlmktop
checking for ocamlmklib... /usr/local/bin/ocamlmklib
checking for ocamldoc... /usr/local/bin/ocamldoc
checking for ocamlbuild... /usr/local/bin/ocamlbuild
checking for OCaml version 312000... ok
checking for ocamllex... /usr/local/bin/ocamllex
checking for ocamllex.opt... /usr/local/bin/ocamllex.opt
checking for ocamlyacc... /usr/local/bin/ocamlyacc
checking for ocamlcp... /usr/local/bin/ocamlcp
checking for ocamlweb... /usr/local/bin/ocamlweb
This is ocamlweb version 1.38, compiled on Sun Nov 9 16:08:42 CET 2014
Copyright (c) 1999-2000 Jean-Christophe Filli?tre and Claude March?
This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY (use option -warranty)
This is ocamlweb version 1.38, compiled on Sun Nov 9 16:08:42 CET 2014
Copyright (c) 1999-2000 Jean-Christophe Filli?tre and Claude March?
This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY (use option -warranty)
OCamlweb version is : ok
checking for OCaml/GTK+ toolkit directory... not found
checking for ocamldot... no
checking for ocamldefun... no
>From gcc-bugs-return-485738-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu May 07 12:39:14 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485738-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 100986 invoked by alias); 7 May 2015 12:39:13 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 100949 invoked by uid 48); 7 May 2015 12:39:09 -0000
From: "vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/66049] Few AArch64 extend and add with shift tests generates sub optimal code with trunk gcc 6.0.
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 12:39:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-66049-4-dABJuY2gvq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66049-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66049-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00578.txt.bz2
Content-length: 5300

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf049

--- Comment #1 from vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
We need patterns based on shifts to match with combiner generated.

Below patch fixes them.

diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
index 1c2c5fb..c5a640d 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
@@ -1555,6 +1555,23 @@
   [(set_attr "type" "alus_shift_imm")]
 )

+(define_insn "*adds_shift_imm_<mode>"
+  [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
+        (compare:CC_NZ
+         (plus:GPI (ASHIFT:GPI
+                    (match_operand:GPI 1 "register_operand" "r")
+                    (match_operand:QI 2 "aarch64_shift_imm_<mode>" "n"))
+                   (match_operand:GPI 3 "register_operand" "r"))
+         (const_int 0)))
+   (set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
+        (plus:GPI (ASHIFT:GPI (match_dup 1) (match_dup 2))
+                  (match_dup 3)))]
+  ""
+  "adds\\t%<w>0, %<w>3, %<w>1, <shift> %2"
+  [(set_attr "type" "alus_shift_imm")]
+)
+
+
 (define_insn "*subs_mul_imm_<mode>"
   [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
        (compare:CC_NZ
@@ -1571,6 +1588,23 @@
   [(set_attr "type" "alus_shift_imm")]
 )

+(define_insn "*subs_shift_imm_<mode>"
+  [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
+        (compare:CC_NZ
+         (minus:GPI (match_operand:GPI 1 "register_operand" "r")
+                    (ASHIFT:GPI
+                     (match_operand:GPI 2 "register_operand" "r")
+                     (match_operand:QI 3 "aarch64_shift_imm_<mode>" "n")))
+         (const_int 0)))
+   (set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
+        (minus:GPI (match_dup 1)
+                   (ASHIFT:GPI (match_dup 2) (match_dup 3))))]
+  ""
+  "subs\\t%<w>0, %<w>1, %<w>2, <shift> %3"
+  [(set_attr "type" "alus_shift_imm")]
+)
+
+
 (define_insn "*adds_<optab><ALLX:mode>_<GPI:mode>"
   [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
        (compare:CC_NZ
@@ -1599,6 +1633,41 @@
   [(set_attr "type" "alus_ext")]
 )

+(define_insn "*adds_<optab><ALLX:mode>_shft_<GPI:mode>"
+  [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
+        (compare:CC_NZ
+         (plus:GPI (ashift:GPI (ANY_EXTEND:GPI
+                                (match_operand:ALLX 1 "register_operand" "r"))
+                               (match_operand 2 "aarch64_imm3" "Ui3"))
+                   (match_operand:GPI 3 "register_operand" "r"))
+        (const_int 0)))
+   (set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=rk")
+        (plus:GPI (ashift:GPI (ANY_EXTEND:GPI (match_dup 1))
+                              (match_dup 2))
+                  (match_dup 3)))]
+  ""
+  "adds\\t%<GPI:w>0, %<GPI:w>3, %<GPI:w>1, <su>xt<ALLX:size> %2"
+  [(set_attr "type" "alus_ext")]
+)
+
+(define_insn "*subs_<optab><ALLX:mode>_shft_<GPI:mode>"
+  [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
+        (compare:CC_NZ
+         (minus:GPI (match_operand:GPI 1 "register_operand" "r")
+                    (ashift:GPI (ANY_EXTEND:GPI
+                                (match_operand:ALLX 2 "register_operand" "r"))
+                               (match_operand 3 "aarch64_imm3" "Ui3")))
+        (const_int 0)))
+   (set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=rk")
+        (minus:GPI (match_dup 1)
+                    (ashift:GPI (ANY_EXTEND:GPI (match_dup 2))
+                              (match_dup 3))))]
+  ""
+  "subs\\t%<GPI:w>0, %<GPI:w>1, %<GPI:w>2, <su>xt<ALLX:size> %3"
+  [(set_attr "type" "alus_ext")]
+)
+
+
 (define_insn "*adds_<optab><mode>_multp2"
   [(set (reg:CC_NZ CC_REGNUM)
        (compare:CC_NZ
@@ -1909,6 +1978,22 @@
   [(set_attr "type" "alu_ext")]
 )

+(define_insn "*add_uxt<mode>_shift2"
+  [(set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=rk")
+        (plus:GPI (and:GPI
+                   (ashift:GPI (match_operand:GPI 1 "register_operand" "r")
+                             (match_operand 2 "aarch64_imm3" "Ui3"))
+                   (match_operand 3 "const_int_operand" "n"))
+                  (match_operand:GPI 4 "register_operand" "r")))]
+  "aarch64_uxt_size (INTVAL (operands[2]), INTVAL (operands[3])) != 0"
+  "*
+  operands[3] = GEN_INT (aarch64_uxt_size (INTVAL(operands[2]),
+                                           INTVAL (operands[3])));
+  return \"add\t%<w>0, %<w>4, %<w>1, uxt%e3 %2\";"
+  [(set_attr "type" "alu_ext")]
+)
+
+
 ;; zero_extend version of above
 (define_insn "*add_uxtsi_multp2_uxtw"
   [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=rk")
@@ -2165,6 +2250,22 @@
   [(set_attr "type" "alu_ext")]
 )

+(define_insn "*sub_uxt<mode>_shift2"
+  [(set (match_operand:GPI 0 "register_operand" "=rk")
+        (minus:GPI (match_operand:GPI 4 "register_operand" "rk")
+                   (and:GPI
+                    (ashift:GPI (match_operand:GPI 1 "register_operand" "r")
+                              (match_operand 2 "aarch64_imm3" "Ui3"))
+                    (match_operand 3 "const_int_operand" "n"))))]
+  "aarch64_uxt_size (INTVAL (operands[2]),INTVAL (operands[3])) != 0"
+  "*
+  operands[3] = GEN_INT (aarch64_uxt_size (INTVAL (operands[2]),
+                                           INTVAL (operands[3])));
+  return \"sub\t%<w>0, %<w>4, %<w>1, uxt%e3 %2\";"
+  [(set_attr "type" "alu_ext")]
+)
+
+
 ;; zero_extend version of above
 (define_insn "*sub_uxtsi_multp2_uxtw"
   [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=rk")

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #26 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
With Andre's patch on top of a clean tree at r222878, I get

============================================================================
Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 280
# PASS:  107
# SKIP:  28
# XFAIL: 1
# FAIL:  142
# XPASS: 2
# ERROR: 0

After 2 hours I lost patience and killed all the tests requiring more than
~10Gb or more than 5 minutes (~30 of them, on a Corei7 with 16Gb of RAM). I
have no idea if such huge memory usage or long time are expected.

I'll test Mikael's patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00027.html.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #27 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
With Mikael's patch I get

============================================================================
Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 280
# PASS:  249
# SKIP:  28
# XFAIL: 3
# FAIL:  0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0

in less than 12 minutes.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[juergen.reuter at desy dot de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #28 from Jürgen Reuter <juergen.reuter at desy dot de> ---
Dominique, comment #27 looks perfect. That would be great for us with the
upcoming revision of gfortran 6.0.0.
>From gcc-bugs-return-485817-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Fri May 08 05:41:56 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485817-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 115687 invoked by alias); 8 May 2015 05:41:56 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 115650 invoked by uid 48); 8 May 2015 05:41:52 -0000
From: "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/66064]=?UTF-8?Q? under O2 level ，x86-64 compiler ICE，informance：internal compiler error?=: in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.c:1894
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 05:41:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
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_known_to_work resolution cf_known_to_fail
Message-ID: <bug-66064-4-he95JDmicC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66064-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66064-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00657.txt.bz2
Content-length: 731

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf064

Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
      Known to work|                            |4.8.4
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
      Known to fail|                            |4.7.4

--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
4.7 is not supported anymore. All current release branches seem fine.

(if you have a contract with suse, you can try to ask them about backporting
patches in their distribution, I don't know how that works)

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #29 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Dominique, comment #27 looks perfect. That would be great for us
> with the upcoming revision of gfortran 6.0.0.

First, obviously Andre's test gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_11.f90 does not
cover all the possible issues. How difficult would it be to infer what is
missing from the list of failures?

Second, I have done some tests with the addition of pending patches:

(1) Mikael's patch + combined patch for pr61831&65792 + patches for pr64674 and
pr65548,

(2) Mikael's patch + patches for pr44672, pr58586, pr64674 and pr65548.

While I get the results of comment 27 with (1), I get the following result with
(2)

============================================================================
Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 280
# PASS:  70
# SKIP:  28
# XFAIL: 1
# FAIL:  179
# XPASS: 2
# ERROR: 0

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #30 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
While the Mikael's patch allows the test suite to run as expected, adding the
patch for pr58586 breaks it again.

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[mikael at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

--- Comment #32 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: mikael
Date: Sat May  9 13:36:14 2015
New Revision: 222968

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222968&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix fortran/65894 elemental procedures wrong-code

gcc/fortran/
2015-05-09  Mikael Morin  <mikael@gcc.gnu.org>

        PR fortran/65894
        * trans-array.h (gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference):
        New prototype.
        * trans-array.c (gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference):
        New function.
        (gfc_add_loop_ss_code): Use gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference
        as conditional.
        (gfc_walk_elemental_function_args): Set the dummy_arg field.
        * trans.h (gfc_ss_info): New subfield dummy_arg.
        * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_procedure_call): Revert the change
        of revision 222361.
        (gfc_conv_expr): Use gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference
        as conditional.

gcc/testsuite/
2015-05-09  Andre Vehreschild  <vehre@gmx.de>

        PR fortran/65894
        * gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_11.f90: New test.


Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_11.f90
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
    trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.h
    trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
    trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.h
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0

[mikael at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894

Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
           Assignee|vehre at gcc dot gnu.org           |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #34 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #33)
> Great, with that comment everything in our code works again, thanks, Mikael.
> So, what about Dominique's comment with the fix for PR 58586 and that this
> breaks our code again. Shall I (try to) investigate this?

Yes, if you have time.
Reduced tests are preferred. ;-)
Anyway, further comments should go to PR58586, I'm closing this PR.
Thanks to the reporter and the testers.
>From gcc-bugs-return-485947-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun May 10 14:17:31 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-485947-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 63067 invoked by alias); 10 May 2015 14:17:31 -0000
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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 63027 invoked by uid 48); 10 May 2015 14:17:26 -0000
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/66086] Casting a pointer to an uintptr_t and later to a double confuses the optimizer
Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 14:17:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: segher at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-66086-4-VLoIN10lkv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66086-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66086-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2015-05/txt/msg00787.txt.bz2
Content-length: 610

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf086

Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |segher at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Converting a pointer to/from integer type is implementation defined
(C99 6.3.2.3/5 and /6).  Converting a uintptr_t to and from double
is perfectly well-defined (and doesn't change the value) if the values
fit (6.3.1.4).