https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94246
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #0)
> I just tried a valgrind version of recent trunk gfortran over testsuite file
> gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90.
>
> I got
>
> $ /home/dcb/gcc/results.20200320.valgrind/bin/gfortran -c
> ./gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90
> ./gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90:64:50:
>
> 64 | if (any (BESSEL_YN(0, 10, 0.0) /= [ (BESSEL_YN(i, 0.0), i = 0, 10)
> ])) &
> | 1
> Error: Result of BESSEL_YN overflows its kind at (1)
> ./gfortran.dg/bessel_5.f90:64:26:
>
> 64 | if (any (BESSEL_YN(0, 10, 0.0) /= [ (BESSEL_YN(i, 0.0), i = 0, 10)
> ])) &
> | 1
> Error: Result of BESSEL_YN is -INF at (1)
> ==1776287== Invalid read of size 8
> ==1776287== at 0x603913: reduce_binary_ac(arith (*)(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*,
> gfc_expr**), gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, gfc_expr**) (arith.c:1325)
> ==1776287== by 0x60397A: reduce_binary_ac(arith (*)(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*,
> gfc_expr**), gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, gfc_expr**) (arith.c:1312)
> ==1776287== by 0x603B34: reduce_binary(arith (*)(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*,
> gfc_expr**), gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*, gfc_expr**) (arith.c:1438)
> ==1776287== by 0x603F72: eval_intrinsic(gfc_intrinsic_op, eval_f,
> gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*) (arith.c:1613)
>
> Please note I didn't use the recommended testsuite flags of
> -Wall -fno-range-check.
>
So, what happens if you do use the required -fno-range-check
option?
