> Probably, alpha is not the only one that fails this assumption.
Indeed! see the thread starting at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-05/msg00127.html
Could you test the following patch
--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bind_c_array_params_2.f90
2014-05-24 16:17:53.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bind_c_array_params_2.f90 2014-05-29
11:34:40.000000000 +0200
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ integer :: aa(4,4)
call test(aa)
end
-! { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "call\[^\n\r\]*myBindC" 1 { target { ! {
hppa*-*-hpux* } } } } }
-! { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "call\[^\n\r\]*myBindC,%r2" 1 { target {
hppa*-*-hpux* } } } }
+! { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\[ \t\]\[$,_0-9\]*myBindC" 1 { target { !
{ hppa*-*-hpux* } } } } }
+! { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "\[ \t\]\[$,_0-9\]*myBindC,%r2" 1 { target
{ hppa*-*-hpux* } } } }
! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "test \\\(&parm\\." 1 "original" } }
! { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "original" } }
with
make -k check-gfortran RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=bind_c_array_params_2.f90
--target_board=unix'{-m32,-m64,-m32/-flto,-m64/-flto}'"
Can you pre-approved it?
TIA
Dominique
