> > Sadly, the testsuite regressions don't seems to be fixed. I will try to > > figure out tomorrow why the function is still being inlined. > > The test case gfortran.dg/do_3.F90 pass with -fno-strict-overflow > (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-09/msg00116.html). > I have posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-09/msg00107.html > a reduced test case without inlining issues showing a similar > breakage. If someone can show that before the recent failure > the functions were not inlined, I think the failure would > be fully explained. Otherwise it will require further investigation.
The testcase was indeed previously not inlined at all. Shall we add -fno-strict-overflow to the testcase then? Honza > > As far as I can tell without -fno-strict-overflow the executable > reduces to a call abort at the level of > > if (i /= final) call abort > > as if final = huge(to)+1_1 giving an overflow, the comparison is > assuming to always fail. I remember a lot of traffic on the gcc mailing > list a couple months ago about this kind of optimization and the > reasons behind -fno-strict-overflow, but I dont have the time right > now to look deeper. > > Dominique
