https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122002

--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle2 at gmail dot com> ---
On 9/19/25 10:28 AM, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122002
> 
> --- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #4)
>> Now I wonder why I dont see it here.
> 
> Can you run:
> 
> valgrind --leak-check=full --track-origins=yes /path/to/f951 -quiet -pedantic
> pdt_13.f03
> 
> I get something similar to Sam:
> 
> ==17800== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> ==17800==    at 0x590F46A: __printf_buffer (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0x592A1F8: __vsprintf_internal (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0x590B180: sprintf (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0xA24B24: gfc_get_pdt_instance(gfc_actual_arglist*,
> gfc_symbol**, gfc_actual_arglist**) (decl.cc:4065)
> ==17800==    by 0xAC5F35: gfc_match_rvalue(gfc_expr**) (primary.cc:4091)
> ==17800==    by 0xA80D12: match_primary (matchexp.cc:217)
> ==17800==    by 0xA80D12: match_level_1 (matchexp.cc:267)
> ==17800==    by 0xA80D12: match_mult_operand(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:323)
> ==17800==    by 0xA80FDC: match_add_operand(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:412)
> ==17800==    by 0xA812D9: match_level_2(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:536)
> ==17800==    by 0xA814BA: match_level_3(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:607)
> ==17800==    by 0xA81602: match_level_4 (matchexp.cc:655)
> ==17800==    by 0xA81602: match_and_operand(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:749)
> ==17800==    by 0xA817DA: match_or_operand(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:778)
> ==17800==    by 0xA818EA: match_equiv_operand(gfc_expr**) (matchexp.cc:821)
> ==17800==  Uninitialised value was created by a stack allocation
> ==17800==    at 0xA2498F: gfc_get_pdt_instance(gfc_actual_arglist*,
> gfc_symbol**, gfc_actual_arglist**) (decl.cc:3878)
> ==17800==
> ==17800== Use of uninitialised value of size 8
> ==17800==    at 0x590436B: _itoa_word (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0x590E913: __printf_buffer (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0x592A1F8: __vsprintf_internal (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0x590B180: sprintf (in /lib64/libc.so.6)
> ==17800==    by 0xA24B24: gfc_get_pdt_instance(gfc_actual_arglist*,
> gfc_symbol**, gfc_actual_arglist**) (decl.cc:4065)
> ...
> 
  I have to head out for a bit. I did regression test the patch that was 
submitted. I am guessing something got mixed up on the commit which I am just 
now building.  I will get back to this when I return.

Jerry

Reply via email to