See also: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92027
for a tracking bug – I just added also some analysis.
Tobias
PS: A better patch submission, with the actual patch attached, would
have been nice. Please re-post the committed patch – and the new patch,
which fixes the fall out. – Thanks!
On 10/9/19 12:26 PM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
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 <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 20:31, Paul Richard Thomas
<paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> 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 <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
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 <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
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 <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
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
