[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-07-07 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #26 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #25) > At expand time, the assignment is > > > ;; c_ = c; > > (insn 35 34 36 (set (reg/f:DI 140) > (unspec:DI [ > (symbol_ref:DI

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-07-06 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #25 from Segher Boessenkool --- At expand time, the assignment is ;; c_ = c; (insn 35 34 36 (set (reg/f:DI 140) (unspec:DI [ (symbol_ref:DI ("*.LANCHOR1") [flags 0x182]) (reg:DI 2 2)

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-07-06 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #24 from Segher Boessenkool --- Is that disallowed? Is there any way to prevent that from happening, in general?

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-07-06 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #23 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On July 6, 2019 12:18:47 AM GMT+02:00, "pthaugen at linux dot ibm.com" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 > >Pat Haugen changed: > > What|Removed

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-07-05 Thread pthaugen at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 Pat Haugen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at linux dot ibm.com,

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-07-02 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #21 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to pthaugen from comment #20) > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #17) > > sched2 swaps the two insns (37 and 40 for me -- use -dp to see the numbers > > in your .s file, use -da if you

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-25 Thread pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-24 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-24 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #18 from Segher Boessenkool --- -mno-power8-fusion seems to fix this. Can you confirm?

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-23 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool --- sched2 swaps the two insns (37 and 40 for me -- use -dp to see the numbers in your .s file, use -da if you want lots of dumps, -dap together). So why did sched2 decide it can swap these? They are in

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-23 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P4 |P3 --- Comment #16 from Thomas Koenig

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-23 Thread paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 --- Comment #15 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- Hi Thomas, I had come to the conclusion that the optimizer is screwing up somehow and was going to suggest testing -fno-inline. Your splitting the files was definitely the smoking

[Bug rtl-optimization/90813] [10 regression] gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_51.f90 fails (SIGSEGV) after 272084

2019-06-23 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Component|fortran |rtl-optimization --- Comment #14 from