https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94109
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig <tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0c39742d618bad5ab5b9dc8ae040612a61e92103 commit r10-8299-g0c39742d618bad5ab5b9dc8ae040612a61e92103 Author: Thomas Koenig <tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org> Date: Sun Jun 14 13:39:43 2020 +0200 When avoiding double deallocation, look at namespace, expression and component. Our finalization handling is a mess. Really, we should get to try and get this fixed for gcc 11. In the meantime, here is a patch which fixes a regression I introduced when fixing a regression with a memory leak. The important thing here is to realize that we do not need to finalize (and deallocate) multiple times for the same expression and the same component in the same namespace. It might cause code size regressions, but better big code than wrong code... Backported from r11-1296-g1af22e455584ef5fcad2b4474c1efc3fd26f6cb3 . gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: PR fortran/94109 * class.c (finalize_component): Return early if finalization has already happened for expression and component within namespace. * gfortran.h (gfc_was_finalized): New type. (gfc_namespace): Add member was_finalzed. (gfc_expr): Remove finalized. * symbol.c (gfc_free_namespace): Free was_finalized. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR fortran/94109 * gfortran.dg/finalize_34.f90: Adjust free counts. * gfortran.dg/finalize_36.f90: New test.
