On 19/04/2012 14:02, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Updated patch enclosed. > > On 02/14/2012 12:42 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote: >> in order to gain an overview for our code whether the recent RESHAPE >> (and friends) bug affects us and to determine for which assignment a >> reallocation happens, useful to mitigate performance issues, I added >> -Wrealloc-lhs and -Wrealloc-lhs-all. >> >> The flag -Wrealloc-lhs is the more useful flag: It's about arrays of >> intrinsic types, which are more likely to appear in hot loops than >> other types of reallocatable variables such as derived types or >> (scalar) character variables with deferred length. > > On 02/27/2012 09:59 PM, Mikael Morin wrote: >>> In turn, the warning might be printed even if at the end no realloc >>> code is >>> generated or present with -O1. >> Can it be caused by the frontend not going in the realloc-lhs >> functions in >> some cases? Especially, it seems that there is a missing >> codimension/coindexed >> condition guarding the warning if I compare to the flag_realloc_lhs >> conditions >> in trans-expr.c I would rather move the warnings to a function and >> call it in the places where we really generate the extra code, like >> it's done for -Warray-temporaries. > > Two months later I have finally worked on the patch again and followed > the suggestion and added the checks to trans-expr.c. > > Build and regtested on x86-64-linux. > OK for the trunk? > Looks good. OK. Thanks.
Mikael
