Re: Possible patch for fortran/57910

2016-10-06 Thread Jerry DeLisle
On 10/06/2016 03:52 PM, Louis Krupp wrote: I've attached an updated patch for pr69955. It works just as you said. Please let me know if this or my patch for pr57910 is OK to check in. Louis Both are OK. Thanks. Jerry

Re: Possible patch for fortran/57910

2016-10-06 Thread Louis Krupp
I've attached an updated patch for pr69955. It works just as you said. Please let me know if this or my patch for pr57910 is OK to check in. Louis On Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:30:29 -0700 Dominique d'Humières wrote > > > Le 6 oct. 2016 à 19:35, Louis Krupp

Re: Possible patch for fortran/57910

2016-10-06 Thread Dominique d'Humières
> Le 6 oct. 2016 à 19:35, Louis Krupp a écrit : > > Dominique, > > Vous avez raison. I attached the wrong patch. I've resent the message with > the correct patch. Which works as expected. Thanks > > I tried to make pr69955.f90 run only on 64-bit Linux: > > ! {

Re: Possible patch for fortran/57910

2016-10-06 Thread Louis Krupp
Dominique, Vous avez raison. I attached the wrong patch. I've resent the message with the correct patch. I tried to make pr69955.f90 run only on 64-bit Linux: ! { dg-do run { target x86_64-*-linux* } } I'm not sure there's a portable way to query virtual memory usage, and testing this on

Re: Possible patch for fortran/57910

2016-10-06 Thread Steve Kargl
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 07:04:36PM +0200, Dominique d'Humières wrote: > Dear Louis, > > > PR fortran/57910 > > * trans-expr.c (gfc_add_interface_mapping): Don't try to > > dereference call-by-value scalar argument. > > > > The patch seems to work without breaking other tests. > >From the patch, I

Re: Possible patch for fortran/57910

2016-10-06 Thread Dominique d'Humières
Dear Louis, > PR fortran/57910 > * trans-expr.c (gfc_add_interface_mapping): Don't try to > dereference call-by-value scalar argument. > > The patch seems to work without breaking other tests. From the patch, I think the PR number is wrong and should be 69955. The test fails on darwin with At