Hi Mikael, This is fine for backporting.
Thanks for doing this. Paul On 6 August 2015 at 12:09, Mikael Morin <mikael.mo...@sfr.fr> wrote: > Le 25/07/2015 20:33, Mikael Morin a écrit : >> >> Le 21/07/2015 23:10, Paul Richard Thomas a écrit : >>> >>> On 21 July 2015 at 14:53, Mikael Morin <mikael.mo...@sfr.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> The fix for PR61831 committed recently [1] introduced/uncovered a NULLL >>>> pointer dereference with iso_varying_string, because a generic symbol >>>> (which >>>> has a NULL result) is used as procedure symbol, instead of the >>>> specific one. >>>> Fixed by using esym if it's available. >>>> >>>> Regression-tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk? >>>> >>>> Mikael >>>> >>>> [1]: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01389.html >>>> >>> >> Hello, >> >> I would like to backport the patch. >> As the bug was discovered with the patch [1] above, the test >> generic_30.f90 works on the branches, which don't have that patch. >> Meanwhile, I have managed to find a test generic_31.f90 that exhibits a >> wrong code already on the branch, which justifies the backport. >> >> Regression tested on the 5 branch, OK for 5 and 4.9? >> > > Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg02160.html -- Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx
