[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a023e688186ea4cd284f5d269f2ecde9f80438c commit r13-7501-g1a023e688186ea4cd284f5d269f2ecde9f80438c Author: Harald Anlauf Date: Tue Apr 18 21:24:20 2023 +0200 testsuite: fix scan-tree-dump patterns [PR83904,PR100297] Adjust scan-tree-dump patterns so that they do not accidentally match a valid path. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR testsuite/83904 PR fortran/100297 * gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90: Use "__builtin_free " instead of the naive "free". * gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90: Extend pattern from a simple "data". (cherry picked from commit 6fc8e25cb6b5d720bedd85194b0ad740d75082f4)
[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |14.0 --- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed.
[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6fc8e25cb6b5d720bedd85194b0ad740d75082f4 commit r14-90-g6fc8e25cb6b5d720bedd85194b0ad740d75082f4 Author: Harald Anlauf Date: Tue Apr 18 21:24:20 2023 +0200 testsuite: fix scan-tree-dump patterns [PR83904,PR100297] Adjust scan-tree-dump patterns so that they do not accidentally match a valid path. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR testsuite/83904 PR fortran/100297 * gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90: Use "__builtin_free " instead of the naive "free". * gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90: Extend pattern from a simple "data".
[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #3)
> "\.data" is the same as ".data", you want either "\\.data" or {\.data}. But
> it still doesn't lower the probability to match a filename by much.
True.
I've compared the dump generated by gfortran <= 10 vs. >= 11, looked at
PR96624 again and came to the conclusion that the absence of the following
was probably intended:
(*(integer(kind=4)[0] * restrict) atmp.0.data)[0] = 1;
(*(integer(kind=4)[0] * restrict) atmp.0.data)[1] = 2;
The following pattern variant succeeds with 11+ and fails with 10-branch:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
index 01799ac5c19..56812124cb8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
@@ -11,4 +11,4 @@ program test
a = reshape([1,2,3,4], [2,0])
print *, a
end
-! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "data" 4 "original" } }
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "data..0. =" "original" } }
This should be safe enough...
[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
"\.data" is the same as ".data", you want either "\\.data" or {\.data}. But it
still doesn't lower the probability to match a filename by much.
[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed||2023-04-16
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
We should adjust the scan strings to avoid collisons with file paths:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90
b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90
index f96ebc499e8..e38953bd777 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90
@@ -107,4 +107,4 @@ contains
end function bar
end program alloc_fun
-! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "free" 10 "original" } }
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "__builtin_free " 10 "original" } }
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
index 01799ac5c19..03861fb26df 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
@@ -11,4 +11,4 @@ program test
a = reshape([1,2,3,4], [2,0])
print *, a
end
-! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "data" 4 "original" } }
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "\.data" 4 "original" } }
[Bug fortran/100297] FAIL: gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90 gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100297 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=83904 --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor --- This is on x86_64-linux. I don't see these failures in the results recently reported to gcc-testresults. Pr83904 also reports some failures in the Fortran test suite, including gfortran.dg/allocatable_function_1.f90
