[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #17 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-02 08:06 --- The following reduced cas: integer,allocatable :: foo(:,:) allocate(foo(0,1:7)) print *, pack(foo(:,1),foo(:,1)==0,(/1,2/)) deallocate(foo) end gives a Bus error when run. It works if I replace the mask by

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #18 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-02 09:53 --- The test of #17 pass on AMD64 with gfortran 4.3.0 20070713, but fails on PPC Darwin8 with gfortran 4.3.0 20070802. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #19 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-02 15:49 --- Created an attachment (id=14009) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14009action=view) gdb session from entering pack_internal to the crash I have also had a look to the results of

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-02 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #20 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-02 17:17 --- (In reply to comment #19) I have also had a look to the results of -fdump-tree-original and to the assembly with and without the flag, but did not see anything obvious. This is very strange. sptr gets

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #21 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-02 17:42 --- Created an attachment (id=14011) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14011action=view) new gdb session with 'watch sptr' -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-01 08:21 --- (In reply to comment #1) This should fix it. This patch is pre-approved (as well as small variations and improvements of it), though it might be worth opening an enhancement PR to note that if the user code has

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 13:51 --- The first test of PR32770, i.e.: program main real, dimension(2) :: a call random_number(a) print *,maxloc(a,mask=.true.) end program main with -fdefault-integer-8 and your patch, gives (PPC Darwin8):

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 14:28 --- gfortran.dg/minmaxloc_1.f90 gives the same error in my build. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 15:36 --- I have had a nonexpert look at the patch and I wonder if + ts.kind = gfc_default_logical_kind; should not be + ts.kind = newkind; ??? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-01 17:16 --- (In reply to comment #5) I have had a nonexpert look at the patch and I wonder if + ts.kind = gfc_default_logical_kind; should not be + ts.kind = newkind; Yes, I believe you are correct.

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net 2007-08-01 17:46 --- Subject: Re: mask and -fdefault-integer-8 On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 15:36 +, dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr wrote: --- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 15:36 --- I have had a

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-01 18:49 --- Even with the correction, the patch didn't pass regression-testing. It's a good thing we do this. I'll continue my investigations. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 19:05 --- With the change my tests now compile (regtesting!-), but gfortran.dg/zero_sized_1.f90 aborts. BTW I don't understand the error: Can't convert LOGICAL(8) to LOGICAL(8) at (1) How can a no operation trigger an

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 19:11 --- The problem is with PACK. If I comment the line call test_pack the test pass. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #13 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 20:17 --- I still have the Bus error. From the backtrace I think the culprit is libgfortran/intrinsics/pack_generic.c. Probably around the lines: pack_internal (gfc_array_char *ret, const gfc_array_char *array,

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-01 20:44 --- (In reply to comment #13) I still have the Bus error. From the backtrace I think the culprit is libgfortran/intrinsics/pack_generic.c. Probably around the lines: Hi Dominique, I just committed a corrected

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-01 20:27 --- Subject: Bug 32954 Author: tkoenig Date: Wed Aug 1 20:27:27 2007 New Revision: 127137 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=127137 Log: 2007-08-01 Thomas Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-08-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-08-01 21:19 --- As far as I can tell, I have applied correctly your latest patch. But the following reduced test ! { dg-do run } ! Transformational functions for zero-sized array and array sections ! Contributed by Francois-Xavier

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-07-31 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug libfortran/32954] mask and -fdefault-integer-8

2007-07-31 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-01 05:52 --- Created an attachment (id=14002) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14002action=view) proposed patch This should fix it. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32954