[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Assignee|vehre at gcc dot gnu.org |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #34 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #33) Great, with that comment everything in our code works again, thanks, Mikael. So, what about Dominique's comment with the fix for PR 58586 and that this breaks our code again. Shall I (try to) investigate this? Yes, if you have time. Reduced tests are preferred. ;-) Anyway, further comments should go to PR58586, I'm closing this PR. Thanks to the reporter and the testers.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #33 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Great, with that comment everything in our code works again, thanks, Mikael. So, what about Dominique's comment with the fix for PR 58586 and that this breaks our code again. Shall I (try to) investigate this?
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #32 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: mikael Date: Sat May 9 13:36:14 2015 New Revision: 222968 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222968root=gccview=rev Log: Fix fortran/65894 elemental procedures wrong-code gcc/fortran/ 2015-05-09 Mikael Morin mik...@gcc.gnu.org PR fortran/65894 * trans-array.h (gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference): New prototype. * trans-array.c (gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference): New function. (gfc_add_loop_ss_code): Use gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference as conditional. (gfc_walk_elemental_function_args): Set the dummy_arg field. * trans.h (gfc_ss_info): New subfield dummy_arg. * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_procedure_call): Revert the change of revision 222361. (gfc_conv_expr): Use gfc_scalar_elemental_arg_saved_as_reference as conditional. gcc/testsuite/ 2015-05-09 Andre Vehreschild ve...@gmx.de PR fortran/65894 * gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_11.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_11.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.c trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-array.h trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.h trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #30 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- While the Mikael's patch allows the test suite to run as expected, adding the patch for pr58586 breaks it again.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #31 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Shall I do any checks now? It seems that Mikael's patch is doing the right thing, and you found the one that breaks it again.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #29 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- Dominique, comment #27 looks perfect. That would be great for us with the upcoming revision of gfortran 6.0.0. First, obviously Andre's test gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_11.f90 does not cover all the possible issues. How difficult would it be to infer what is missing from the list of failures? Second, I have done some tests with the addition of pending patches: (1) Mikael's patch + combined patch for pr6183165792 + patches for pr64674 and pr65548, (2) Mikael's patch + patches for pr44672, pr58586, pr64674 and pr65548. While I get the results of comment 27 with (1), I get the following result with (2) Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6 # TOTAL: 280 # PASS: 70 # SKIP: 28 # XFAIL: 1 # FAIL: 179 # XPASS: 2 # ERROR: 0
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING --- Comment #16 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- Patch submitted at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00025.html This patch also fixes the issue in comment #15.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #17 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- (In reply to vehre from comment #16) Patch submitted at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00025.html This patch also fixes the issue in comment #15. First of all, thanks for the efforts. Does this also fix the ICE in #11?
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #26 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- With Andre's patch on top of a clean tree at r222878, I get Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6 # TOTAL: 280 # PASS: 107 # SKIP: 28 # XFAIL: 1 # FAIL: 142 # XPASS: 2 # ERROR: 0 After 2 hours I lost patience and killed all the tests requiring more than ~10Gb or more than 5 minutes (~30 of them, on a Corei7 with 16Gb of RAM). I have no idea if such huge memory usage or long time are expected. I'll test Mikael's patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00027.html.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #20 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- Patch submitted at: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-05/msg00025.html This patch also fixes the issue in comment #15. With the submitted patch I have been able to build the whizard package. The summary for 'make check' is Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6 # TOTAL: 280 # PASS: 60 # SKIP: 167 # XFAIL: 0 # FAIL: 53 # XPASS: 0 # ERROR: 0 Many failures are of the kind FAIL: models.run Running script ./models.run | Writing log to 'models.log' | | Running self-test: models | Running test: models_1 ... success. Running test: models_2| Reading model file '/Users/dominiq/Downloads/whizard-2.2.6/share/models/Test.mdl' whizard(55852,0x7fff72381300) malloc: *** error for object 0x7fff54a0a5e8: pointer being freed was not allocated *** set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug Is this expected?
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #23 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- That would be cool. If you have OCaml installed (version 3.12 or newer, and as a French you couldn't complain about that^^) you could run a lot more from the test suite.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- That would be cool. If you have OCaml installed (version 3.12 or newer, and as a French you couldn't complain about that^^) you could run a lot more from the test suite. I have The OCaml toplevel, version 4.02.1 What should I do to use it?
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #18 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- Yes, it also fixes the ICE in #11. The code example is part of the regression test added. I hope you don't mind. Most parts of the regression test added base on your reported issues. Additionally the whizard code mentioned in #1 is compiling and running again.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #21 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- No this is not expected. There seems to be another problem inside gfortran 6.0.0 trunk. I cannot test things before tomorrow/weekend.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #22 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- No this is not expected. There seems to be another problem inside gfortran 6.0.0 trunk. I cannot test things before tomorrow/weekend. I will try with a tree with less patches.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #28 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Dominique, comment #27 looks perfect. That would be great for us with the upcoming revision of gfortran 6.0.0.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #27 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- With Mikael's patch I get Testsuite summary for WHIZARD 2.2.6 # TOTAL: 280 # PASS: 249 # SKIP: 28 # XFAIL: 3 # FAIL: 0 # XPASS: 0 # ERROR: 0 in less than 12 minutes.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #19 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Of course, we are fine (or even happy) if you take our code examples for your regression tests.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #25 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Just do the configuration without the --disable-ocaml flag (the default is that OCaml is enabled). The configure should show then something like that (Ocamlweb is not needed): configure: -- configure: --- Objective Caml checks --- configure: checking for ocaml... /usr/local/bin/ocaml checking for ocamlc... /usr/local/bin/ocamlc OCaml version is 4.02.1 OCaml library path is /usr/local/lib/ocaml checking for ocamlopt... /usr/local/bin/ocamlopt checking for ocamlc.opt... /usr/local/bin/ocamlc.opt checking for ocamlopt.opt... /usr/local/bin/ocamlopt.opt checking for ocamldep... /usr/local/bin/ocamldep checking for ocamlmktop... /usr/local/bin/ocamlmktop checking for ocamlmklib... /usr/local/bin/ocamlmklib checking for ocamldoc... /usr/local/bin/ocamldoc checking for ocamlbuild... /usr/local/bin/ocamlbuild checking for OCaml version 312000... ok checking for ocamllex... /usr/local/bin/ocamllex checking for ocamllex.opt... /usr/local/bin/ocamllex.opt checking for ocamlyacc... /usr/local/bin/ocamlyacc checking for ocamlcp... /usr/local/bin/ocamlcp checking for ocamlweb... /usr/local/bin/ocamlweb This is ocamlweb version 1.38, compiled on Sun Nov 9 16:08:42 CET 2014 Copyright (c) 1999-2000 Jean-Christophe Filli?tre and Claude March? This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY (use option -warranty) This is ocamlweb version 1.38, compiled on Sun Nov 9 16:08:42 CET 2014 Copyright (c) 1999-2000 Jean-Christophe Filli?tre and Claude March? This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY (use option -warranty) OCamlweb version is : ok checking for OCaml/GTK+ toolkit directory... not found checking for ocamldot... no checking for ocamldefun... no
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- Created attachment 35464 [details] Follow-up patch fixing latest regression. With this patch all code samples and the code in the tar-archive compile and execute well. This patch will need most of my previous patches. The total set of all of my patches is available on the gitmirror in the branch vehre/head_cosmo With this patch I still get the ICE when compiling the file evaluators.f90.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #35407|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #12 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 35464 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35464action=edit Follow-up patch fixing latest regression. With this patch all code samples and the code in the tar-archive compile and execute well. This patch will need most of my previous patches. The total set of all of my patches is available on the gitmirror in the branch vehre/head_cosmo
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #13 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- I will give it a try as soon as possible. Any idea how long propagation into the trunk might last?
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #14 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- That solely depends on the availability of reviews. At the moment getting a review is quite difficult. Btw, when you can use docker, then there is docker image available at: https://registry.hub.docker.com/u/cmbant/docker-gcc-build/ But this also needs to compile first. Check the Build Details tab, whether it succeeded. I do not maintain this docker file, just for info.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #10 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9) With the attached patch your small test case and the test suite runs w/o segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok with the patch. Confirmed. The bigger test in comment 2 runs without segfault also. However I get an ICE when compiling the full package at http://whizard.hepforge.org/versions/unofficial/whizard-2.2.6_alpha-20150426. tar.gz libtool: compile: gfc -I../basics -I../utilities -I../testing -I../system -I../combinatorics -I../expr_base -I../physics -g -O2 -c evaluators.f90 -fno-common -o .libs/evaluators.o evaluators.f90:897:0: .or. qn_mask_rest 1 internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at fortran/trans-expr.c:9203 I confirm this ICE with the patch and will provide a smaller test case soon.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #11 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Here is the small test case for the ICE with the patch provided Andre Vehreschild: gfortran -c evaluators.f90 evaluators.f90:40:0: .or. qn_mask_rest 1 internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at fortran/trans-expr.c:9187 evaluators.f90:40:0: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6 gfortran: internal compiler error: Abort trap: 6 (program f951) This is the code: module evaluators implicit none private type :: quantum_numbers_mask_t contains generic :: operator(.or.) = quantum_numbers_mask_or procedure, private :: quantum_numbers_mask_or end type quantum_numbers_mask_t type :: index_map_t integer, dimension(:), allocatable :: entry end type index_map_t type :: prt_mask_t logical, dimension(:), allocatable :: entry end type prt_mask_t type :: qn_mask_array_t type(quantum_numbers_mask_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: mask end type qn_mask_array_t contains elemental function quantum_numbers_mask_or (mask1, mask2) result (mask) type(quantum_numbers_mask_t) :: mask class(quantum_numbers_mask_t), intent(in) :: mask1, mask2 end function quantum_numbers_mask_or subroutine make_product_interaction (prt_is_connected, qn_mask_in, qn_mask_rest) type(prt_mask_t), dimension(2), intent(in) :: prt_is_connected type(qn_mask_array_t), dimension(2), intent(in) :: qn_mask_in type(quantum_numbers_mask_t), intent(in) :: qn_mask_rest type(index_map_t), dimension(2) :: prt_index_in integer :: i type(quantum_numbers_mask_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: qn_mask allocate (qn_mask (2)) do i = 1, 2 qn_mask(prt_index_in(i)%entry) = pack (qn_mask_in(i)%mask, prt_is_connected(i)%entry) .or. qn_mask_rest end do end subroutine make_product_interaction end module evaluators
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- With the attached patch your small test case and the test suite runs w/o segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok with the patch. Confirmed. The bigger test in comment 2 runs without segfault also. However I get an ICE when compiling the full package at http://whizard.hepforge.org/versions/unofficial/whizard-2.2.6_alpha-20150426.tar.gz libtool: compile: gfc -I../basics -I../utilities -I../testing -I../system -I../combinatorics -I../expr_base -I../physics -g -O2 -c evaluators.f90 -fno-common -o .libs/evaluators.o evaluators.f90:897:0: .or. qn_mask_rest 1 internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at fortran/trans-expr.c:9203
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #7 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Created attachment 35404 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35404action=edit Code that triggers the segmentation fault.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #4 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- Looks like this is my patch's fault. I will investigate and report back. Because this is on trunk and seems to not make gfortran completely unusable, I would like not to withdraw the commit, but to fix the issue in a later patch.
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0 Summary|severe regression in|[6 Regression] severe |gfortran 6.0.0 |regression in gfortran ||6.0.0
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #5 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Here is a reduced test case (where iso_varying_string.f90 is the standard module with 1 or 2 modifications by us). As this is at the core of our program, we do rely on a timely fix in order to further use and test gfortran 6.0. module model_data use iso_varying_string, string_t = varying_string implicit none private public :: field_data_t public :: model_data_t type :: field_data_t private integer :: pdg = 0 type(string_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: name contains procedure :: init = field_data_init procedure :: get_pdg = field_data_get_pdg end type field_data_t type :: model_data_t private type(string_t) :: name type(field_data_t), dimension(:), allocatable :: field contains generic :: init = model_data_init procedure, private :: model_data_init generic :: get_pdg = model_data_get_field_pdg_index procedure, private :: model_data_get_field_pdg_index generic :: get_field_ptr = model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg procedure, private :: model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg procedure :: get_field_ptr_by_index = model_data_get_field_ptr_index procedure :: init_sm_test = model_data_init_sm_test end type model_data_t contains subroutine field_data_init (prt, pdg) class(field_data_t), intent(out) :: prt integer, intent(in) :: pdg prt%pdg = pdg end subroutine field_data_init elemental function field_data_get_pdg (prt) result (pdg) integer :: pdg class(field_data_t), intent(in) :: prt pdg = prt%pdg end function field_data_get_pdg subroutine model_data_init (model, name, n_field) class(model_data_t), intent(out) :: model type(string_t), intent(in) :: name integer, intent(in) :: n_field model%name = name allocate (model%field (n_field)) end subroutine model_data_init function model_data_get_field_pdg_index (model, i) result (pdg) class(model_data_t), intent(in) :: model integer, intent(in) :: i integer :: pdg pdg = model%field(i)%get_pdg () end function model_data_get_field_pdg_index function model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg (model, pdg, check) result (ptr) class(model_data_t), intent(in), target :: model integer, intent(in) :: pdg logical, intent(in), optional :: check type(field_data_t), pointer :: ptr integer :: i, pdg_abs if (pdg == 0) then ptr = null () return end if pdg_abs = abs (pdg) do i = 1, size (model%field) if (model%field(i)%get_pdg () == pdg_abs) then ptr = model%field(i) return end if end do ptr = null () end function model_data_get_field_ptr_pdg function model_data_get_field_ptr_index (model, i) result (ptr) class(model_data_t), intent(in), target :: model integer, intent(in) :: i type(field_data_t), pointer :: ptr ptr = model%field(i) end function model_data_get_field_ptr_index subroutine model_data_init_sm_test (model) class(model_data_t), intent(out) :: model type(field_data_t), pointer :: field integer, parameter :: n_field = 19 call model%init (var_str (SM_test), n_field) field = model%get_field_ptr_by_index (1) call field%init (1) end subroutine model_data_init_sm_test end module model_data module flavors use model_data implicit none private public :: flavor_t type :: flavor_t private integer :: f = 0 type(field_data_t), pointer :: field_data = null () contains generic :: init = flavor_init0_model procedure, private :: flavor_init0_model end type flavor_t contains impure elemental subroutine flavor_init0_model (flv, f, model) class(flavor_t), intent(inout) :: flv integer, intent(in) :: f class(model_data_t), intent(in), target :: model flv%f = f flv%field_data = model%get_field_ptr (f, check=.true.) end subroutine flavor_init0_model end module flavors module beams use model_data use flavors implicit none private public :: beam_1 contains subroutine beam_1 (u) integer, intent(in) :: u type(flavor_t), dimension(2) :: flv real, dimension(2) :: pol_f type(model_data_t), target :: model call model%init_sm_test () call flv%init ([1,-1], model) pol_f(1) = 0.5 end subroutine beam_1 end module beams program main use beams call beam_1 (6) end program main
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #6 from Jürgen Reuter juergen.reuter at desy dot de --- Created attachment 35403 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35403action=edit Auxiliary module
[Bug fortran/65894] [6 Regression] severe regression in gfortran 6.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65894 --- Comment #8 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 35407 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35407action=edit A first patch. With the attached patch your small test case and the testsuite runs w/o segfault now. Furthermore does gcc6 bootstrap and regtest ok with the patch.
