Hi, I can confirm that I don’t see this failure on a Debian bullseye/sid (Linux 5.11.0-46, glibc 2.31-0ubuntu9.2) with a fresh bootstrap of master:
$ grep signaling testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.sum PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O0 (test for excess errors) PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O0 execution test PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O1 (test for excess errors) PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O1 execution test PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O2 (test for excess errors) PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O2 execution test PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (test for excess errors) PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess errors) PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -O3 -g execution test PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -Os (test for excess errors) PASS: gfortran.dg/ieee/signaling_1.f90 -Os execution test It’s showing on some gcc-testresults for x86_64 and aarch64 linux, so I’ll need someone (HJ, Andreas are in CC) to show me what the error is. It may be related to the use of dg-options instead of dg-additional-options in that testcase, so I pushed the attached fix. I’ll check the test results mailing-list to see if it improved things (or confirm when the error message is posted). FX
test.patch
Description: Binary data
