https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94246
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #0) > I just tried a valgrind version of recent trunk gfortran over testsuite file > gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90. > > I got > > $ /home/dcb/gcc/results.20200320.valgrind/bin/gfortran -c > ./gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90 > ./gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90:64:50: > > 64 | if (any (BESSEL_YN(0, 10, 0.0) /= [ (BESSEL_YN(i, 0.0), i = 0, 10) > ])) & > | 1 > Error: Result of BESSEL_YN overflows its kind at (1) > ./gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90:64:26: > > 64 | if (any (BESSEL_YN(0, 10, 0.0) /= [ (BESSEL_YN(i, 0.0), i = 0, 10) > ])) & > | 1 > Error: Result of BESSEL_YN is -INF at (1) > ==1776287== Invalid read of size 8 > ==1776287== at 0x603913: reduce_binary_ac(arith (*)(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, > gfc_expr**), gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, gfc_expr**) (arith.c:1325) > ==1776287== by 0x60397A: reduce_binary_ac(arith (*)(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, > gfc_expr**), gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, gfc_expr**) (arith.c:1312) > ==1776287== by 0x603B34: reduce_binary(arith (*)(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, > gfc_expr**), gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, gfc_expr**) (arith.c:1438) > ==1776287== by 0x603F72: eval_intrinsic(gfc_intrinsic_op, eval_f, > gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*) (arith.c:1613) > > Please note I didn't use the recommended testsuite flags of > -Wall -fno-range-check. > So, what happens if you do use the required -fno-range-check option?