From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 0EE193858C53; Sat, 15 Jul 2023 07:50:19 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0EE193858C53
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1689407420;
	bh=6vGo3quPeg8KsJpi/C2VvIYju5vG2dPsNphtcLlwmpQ=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=PyysB5MqDXJYGlmh84CMopLw1suddixexJWGoa0NadBWSqsbqEYSKsTCiC5I6S28G
	 LRd4PP4dXGG5ySe5h92N+jqNt8lL/7r2GMzZUzdB8pKfcZ/uv1pWQ8RqA76mZ8E27m
	 oWCoUkr27ZEtOk3Bar7IlvZHJg2S+rTjSh9/xNVA=
From: "sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/99139] ICE: gfc_get_default_type(): Bad symbol
 '__tmp_UNKNOWN_0_rank_1'
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2023 07:50:19 +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: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-99139-4-eBMlNQmrYu@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-99139-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-99139-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99139

--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> -=
--
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 06:15:44AM +0000, pault at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99139
>=20
> --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #7)
> > Updating known-to-work/known to fail version.
> >=20
> > Paul/Steve: do you want to assign this PR to one of you?
>=20
> I am of two minds as to whether or not to backport the patch or to close =
the
> PRs as resolved.
>=20
> Thoughts?
>=20

Is this patch a "side-effect" of your larger attack on ASSOCIATE
bugs?  If it's independent of that effort, I see no reason to
backport.=