I've attached an updated patch for pr69955. It works just as you said. Please let me know if this or my patch for pr57910 is OK to check in.
Louis
---- On Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:30:29 -0700 Dominique d'Humières
<domi...@lps.ens.fr> wrote ----
>
> > Le 6 oct. 2016 à 19:35, Louis Krupp <louis.kr...@zoho.com> a écrit :
> >
> > Dominique,
> >
> > Vous avez raison. I attached the wrong patch. I've resent the message
> > with the correct patch.
>
> Which works as expected. Thanks
>
> >
> > I tried to make pr69955.f90 run only on 64-bit Linux:
> >
> > ! { dg-do run { target x86_64-*-linux* } }
> >
> > I'm not sure there's a portable way to query virtual memory usage, and
> > testing this on one platform seemed to be better than nothing.
> >
> > Did I get the target wrong? Or do I need to figure out how to make this
> > work on Darwin?
>
> I did miss the the target restriction and I tried to run the test manually
> with the result I reported. Running it through dejagnu show it as
> UNSUPPORTED.
>
> Now my general concern is that restricting any test to linux may hide
> problems with target A or B (darwin for me, but AIX or BSD for others).
> AFAICT the standard way to check fixes for memory leaks is to use either
>
> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "__builtin_malloc" xx "original" } }
>
> see, e.g., gfortran.dg/move_alloc_15.f90
>
> and/or
>
> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "__builtin_free" xx "original" } }
>
> see, e.g., gfortran.dg/transfer_intrinsic_6.f90.
>
> For the original test in pr69955, there are 4 "__builtin_free" and 5
> "__builtin_malloc" before your patch, i.e., a memory leak, but only 4 after
> the patch.
>
> I know that scan-tree-dump-times are quite fragile, but at least they are
> portable from a target to another one.
>
> I hope it helps.
>
> Dominique
>
> >
> > Louis
> >
> >
> > ---- On Thu, 06 Oct 2016 10:04:36 -0700 Dominique d'Humières
> > <domi...@lps.ens.fr> wrote ----
> >> Dear Louis,
> >>
> >>> PR fortran/57910
> >>> * trans-expr.c (gfc_add_interface_mapping): Don't try to
> >>> dereference call-by-value scalar argument.
> >>>
> >>> The patch seems to work without breaking other tests.
> >> From the patch, I think the PR number is wrong and should be 69955.
> >>
> >> The test fails on darwin with
> >>
> >> At line 71 of file /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr69955.f90
> >> (unit = 21)
> >> Fortran runtime error: Cannot open file '/proc/974/statm': No such file
> >> or directory
> >>
> >> Thanks for working on this issue,
> >>
> >> Dominique
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
pr69955.f90
Description: Binary data
