https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108872
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.5.0
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108581
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2023-03-28 00:00:00 |2025-9-11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110629
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109066
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121616
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2025-September/062821.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121616
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121628
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121616
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82480
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121628
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> For debugging, one can reduce the loop body further:
>
> a = b
> b = a
>
> is sufficient for a crash in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14/15 Regression] ICE |[13/14 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121628
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82480
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121728
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121796
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14/15/16 Regression]|[13/14/15 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #62285|0 |1
is obsolete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #2)
> Created attachment 62285 [details]
> Tentative patch
>
> This fixes the issue here, but is not regtested, and touches code from
> Paul...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121727
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121727
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-08-31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121727
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 62247
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62247&action=edit
Draft patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121728
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> Adding 'implicit none' leads to proper rejection of the testcase:
>
> pr121728.f90:8:12:
>
> 8 | type(t(n)) :: z
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121728
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
As I did see gfortran.dg/pr95090.f90 failing on some targets, I did run
f951 on it under valgrind and reduced it to the following:
module
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93330
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 62240
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62240&action=edit
Testcase
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121727
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93330
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93330
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107421
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-08-27
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121626
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Maybe related to pr120483, which was recently fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90795
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
Keywords
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121203
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121145
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121263
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.5
Summary|ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121185
--- Comment #27 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #26)
> (In reply to kargls from comment #25)
> > (In reply to anlauf from comment #18)
> > > (In reply to Jürgen Reuter from commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121185
--- Comment #24 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #23)
> Shorter reproducer for (at least one of) the close-to-minimal one:
Similar failures with multiplication instead of division, whether complex,
real,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121185
--- Comment #23 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Shorter reproducer for (at least one of) the close-to-minimal one:
program p
implicit none
type t
complex, allocatable :: x(:)
end type t
type, extends (t) :: t2
end type t2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121185
--- Comment #18 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #17)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #15)
> > > Created attachment 61950 [detai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121185
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121185
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #16 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121203
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121203
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61924
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61924&action=edit
Tentative fix
This fixes the testcase. Needs further testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121203
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note: the code works properly when eval is a contained subroutine, as in:
program p
character(10), external :: f
call eval(f,"abc")
call eval(f,"abc") ! double free or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121204
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121203
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121145
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libfortran |fortran
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121145
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-07-17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118580
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #23 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #22)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #21)
> > A pragmatic solution might be to pattern-match (by name) some of the
> > af
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #20 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #18)
> Plus, ASYNCHRONOUS means that the variable can change even in
> the absence of a call, so
>
>CALL FOO (A)
>A = 2
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #16 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #15)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #14)
> > (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #13)
> > > I think we have quite a few bad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #13)
> I think we have quite a few bad choices here, each with different drawbacks.
> I don't think we should do nothing, or pessimize ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #10)
> The problem is not restricted to mpi_isend.
This was supposed to read: ... not restricted to mpi_irecv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120843
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120843
--- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #6)
> The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15413e05eb9cde976b8890cd9b597d0a41a8eb27
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #7)
> (In reply to kargls from comment #5)
> >
> > So, if I understand, you want an fnspec of ". . w w w w w w w".
> > Can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120958
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120847
--- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #8)
> Created attachment 61779 [details]
> Reduced testcase
>
> This is roughly the minimum I got.
Even the nint is not needed...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120847
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61779
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61779&action=edit
Reduced testcase
This is roughly the minimum I got.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120847
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andre Vehreschild from comment #3)
> > Will backport to gcc-15 in about a week.
>
> I am still getting a failure on trun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120812
--- Comment #12 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Christophe Peyret from comment #11)
> same on Mac ARM :)
Good. So it is most likely the issue with SAVEd pointer/allocatable
that was recently fixed.
To verify, you can try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Regtested fine here.
Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2025-June/062395.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
--- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed by:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/interface.cc b/gcc/fortran/interface.cc
index cdb838d8336..7899864158c 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/interface.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/interface.cc
@@ -457,7 +457,9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61738
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61738&action=edit
New testcase
The committed patch unfortunately broke this (reduced) testcase:
pr120784-v2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #7)
> Created attachment 61738 [details]
> New testcase
>
> The committed patch unfortunately broke this (reduced) testcase:
We run into the followi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120812
--- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Christophe Peyret from comment #8)
> try this on Mac with Fortran 15.1.0
>
>
> program main
>
> use iso_c_binding
> implicit none
>
> character(le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119106
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andre Vehreschild from comment #5)
> Harald, are you still on this?
No. As I wrote, I got stuck.
Please take over if you wish!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120743
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120812
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #5)
> (In reply to kargls from comment #4)
> > (In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> >
> > troutmask:sgk[215] gfcx --version
> &g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120711
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andre Vehreschild from comment #1)
> Confirmed, but this is not coarray dependent. For me it also crashes without
> -fcoarray=single.
Indeed. valgrind reports an invalid rea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120812
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Works as expected on Linux.
What happens if you replace C_NEW_LINE by something different,
like c_carriage_return, or c_null_char, and pipe the output
through "cat -v"?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120812
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #2)
> Harald, there's a bug (at least it fails on FreeBSD).Here's
> a testcase based on the original code. On FreeBSD, I see
>
> %
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120743
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120711
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There is another recent PR on using array constructors of derived types
with allocatable character components, quite similar to this one.
Cannot find it now, but very likely related.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120743
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #3)
> >
> > Here is a smaller reproducer.
> >
> ...
> >
> > Delete the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120788
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61694
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61694&action=edit
Untested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120784
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51961
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82036
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.4.1, 13.4.1, 14.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46299
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
Keywords
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51961
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120656
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51961
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110076
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Known to work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82480
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32630
Bug 32630 depends on bug 38220, which changed state.
Bug 38220 Summary: C_LOC intrinsic non-pure and without explicit interface
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585
Bug 20585 depends on bug 38220, which changed state.
Bug 38220 Summary: C_LOC intrinsic non-pure and without explicit interface
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29670
Bug 29670 depends on bug 38220, which changed state.
Bug 38220 Summary: C_LOC intrinsic non-pure and without explicit interface
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38220
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119994
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 61582
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61582&action=edit
Exploratory patch
This patch tries to improve upon the determination of whether a symbol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99838
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99838
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
1 - 100 of 1891 matches
Mail list logo
