Hi Folks,
This bug is a result of a range check we do on kind=8 unit numbers to
make sure they fall within the range values of a kind=4 integer. We were
limiting this range to positive values. I think when we introduced the
newunit feature which uses negative unit values, we missed this adjustment.
The attached patch is trivial. Regression tested on x86_86-pc-linux-gnu.
I will back port to 6 an 7 after approval here. I will use the case in
the PR as a new test case.
OK for trunk?
Regards,
Jerry
2018-02-23 Jerry DeLisle <jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/84506
* trans-io.c (set_parameter_value_inquire): Adjust range check of
negative unit values for kind=8 units to the kind=4 negative limit.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c
index 021c788ba54..36adb034475 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-io.c
@@ -639,12 +639,12 @@ set_parameter_value_inquire (stmtblock_t *block, tree var,
/* Don't evaluate the UNIT number multiple times. */
se.expr = gfc_evaluate_now (se.expr, &se.pre);
- /* UNIT numbers should be greater than zero. */
+ /* UNIT numbers should be greater than the min. */
i = gfc_validate_kind (BT_INTEGER, 4, false);
+ val = gfc_conv_mpz_to_tree (gfc_integer_kinds[i].pedantic_min_int, 4);
cond1 = build2_loc (input_location, LT_EXPR, logical_type_node,
se.expr,
- fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (se.expr),
- integer_zero_node));
+ fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (se.expr), val));
/* UNIT numbers should be less than the max. */
val = gfc_conv_mpz_to_tree (gfc_integer_kinds[i].huge, 4);
cond2 = build2_loc (input_location, GT_EXPR, logical_type_node,
