From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 108751 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2019 10:26:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 108730 invoked by uid 89); 9 Oct 2019 10:26:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*f:sk:CAKdteO, H*i:sk:CAKdteO, Christophe X-HELO: mail-lj1-f178.google.com Received: from mail-lj1-f178.google.com (HELO mail-lj1-f178.google.com) (209.85.208.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 10:26:31 +0000 Received: by mail-lj1-f178.google.com with SMTP id m13so1882882ljj.11; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 03:26:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9KxQO2fQjcNtYfrAw5A6UMWAiJ2UGHW+Ooe4uh5o47c=; b=MGFf5BAHID8pHbUWeHfhdNEKaH6X/4XAOH3FzwjVhaIPpVJRcU6VEGNJfMqbOuOFvu YBx8jcvrrim3ny45plAZc0aM/2OpqDb1awInLsNZSVhE2vYWI6BpqfH+QjrbThHs5a23 oN5VqNM5/XP5xEtTPWwu4W7nIq3cCdFAAqNa+JZKhFC0OARKAfC01TY5v6R0d2r2BHx+ SCTn65W67x5vnLwMvmJGfsXpNxttpJzolWBsTpzuz7+eXqaEkx6vFUuCJQWt2xB96tLN ooazB1EDhsAFmnyTD2i5WE38mktgKLUTBbUNr3Ipv94t+1af05r+npuvCEKJTOL00oBf RBPg== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Paul Richard Thomas Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 11:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] PR91926 - assumed rank optional To: Christophe Lyon Cc: "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches , Gilles Gouaillardet Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-SW-Source: 2019-10/txt/msg00605.txt.bz2 Hi Christophe, Thanks for flagging this up - I am back at base on Saturday and will take it up then. Regards Paul On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 11:13, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > Hi, > > > On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 20:31, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: >> >> I must apologise not posting this before committing. I left for a >> vacation this morning and I thought that this problem and the one >> posted by Gilles were best fixed before departing. The patch only >> touches the new ISO_Fortran binding feature and so I thought that I >> would be safe to do this. >> >> It was fully regtested and only applies to trunk. >> >> Paul >> >> Author: pault >> Date: Sat Oct 5 08:17:55 2019 >> New Revision: 276624 >> >> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276624&root=gcc&view=rev >> Log: >> 2019-10-05 Paul Thomas >> >> PR fortran/91926 >> * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_gfc_desc_to_cfi_desc): Correct the >> assignment of the attribute field to account correctly for an >> assumed shape dummy. Assign separately to the gfc and cfi >> descriptors since the atribute can be different. Add btanch to >> correctly handle missing optional dummies. >> >> 2019-10-05 Paul Thomas >> >> PR fortran/91926 >> * gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.f90 : New test. >> * gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.c : Additional source. >> * gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_14.f90 : New test. >> >> 2019-10-05 Paul Thomas >> >> PR fortran/91926 >> * runtime/ISO_Fortran_binding.c (cfi_desc_to_gfc_desc): Do not >> modify the bounds and offset for CFI_other. >> >> Added: >> trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.c >> trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.f90 >> trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_14.f90 >> Modified: >> trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog >> trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c >> trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog >> trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog >> trunk/libgfortran/runtime/ISO_Fortran_binding.c > > > > Since this was committed (r276624), I have noticed regressions on arm-linux-gnueabihf: > FAIL: gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_11.f90 -O3 -g execution test > I've seen other reports on gcc-testresults too. > > Christophe > -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein