Is there any objection to commit the following (see comments 21 and 22)? Dominique
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 229793) +++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (working copy) @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +2015-11-05 Dominique d'Humieres <domi...@lps.ens.fr> + + PR fortran/54224 + * gfortran.dg/warn_unused_function_2.f90: Add two new + "defined but not used" subroutines. + 2015-11-05 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loadpre2.c: Avoid undefined behavior due to Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/warn_unused_function_2.f90 =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/warn_unused_function_2.f90 (revision 229793) +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/warn_unused_function_2.f90 (working copy) @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ ! { dg-options "-Wall" } ! ! [4.8 Regression] PR 54997: -Wunused-function gives false warnings +! PR 54224: missing warnings with -Wunused-function ! ! Contributed by Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> @@ -14,6 +15,9 @@ subroutine s1 ! { dg-warning "defined but not used" } call s2(s3) + contains + subroutine s4 ! { dg-warning "defined but not used" } + end subroutine end subroutine subroutine s2(dummy) ! { dg-warning "Unused dummy argument" } @@ -30,5 +34,10 @@ entry en end subroutine +program test +contains + subroutine s5 ! { dg-warning "defined but not used" } + end subroutine +end ! { dg-final { cleanup-modules "m" } }