--- Comment #26 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 19:07 ---
Subject: Bug 43227
Author: pault
Date: Tue Apr 20 19:07:14 2010
New Revision: 158570
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158570
Log:
2010-04-20 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/43227
* re
--- Comment #25 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-04-20 09:31 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
in mio_expr
Dominiq,
>
> Note for the record that it gives an additional error for PR43266 instead of
> the ICE:
>
> pr43266.f90:37
--- Comment #24 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-20 09:18 ---
The patch in comment #23 works fine on my tests. Thanks for it.
> Also included is the fix for PR43266, which was first posted on March 27 and
> is
> very 'obvious'.
Note for the record that it gives an additional
--- Comment #23 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 06:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=20433)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20433&action=view)
fix for this PR and PR43266
The attached is what I intend to submit tonight, unless somebody approves it in
the
--- Comment #22 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-20 05:00 ---
(In reply to comment #21)
>
> Could you explain what the other stuff is needed for? I currently fail to see
> that.
>
Ignore the first bit in resolve.c,
The change to trans-decl.c fixes the second segfault. The
--- Comment #21 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 21:34 ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Created an attachment (id=20429)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20429&action=view) [edit]
> A provisional fix for the PR
Yes, the following parts are approved (they'r
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 21:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=20429)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20429&action=view)
A provisional fix for the PR
This needs cleaning up and FAILUREs of the gfc_resolve_expr's need dealing
with.
O
--- Comment #19 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-19 20:13 ---
Note that the patch in comment #7 fixes the test in comment #3 when the 'type
t_string' block is uncommented. But there is still a "Segmentation fault" when
the line
! procedure(string_to_char),pointer :: char2
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 18:48 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
I sort of doubt it. The problem arises because mio_symbol crashes in writing
the character length of the procedure symbol:
Breakpoint 1, mio_symbol (sym=0x9d02370)
at ../../fortran-dev/
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 18:47 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> I think the culprit is:
>
> Date: Sat Jul 25 11:56:35 2009
> New Revision: 150078
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=150078
Close, but not quite :)
It's actually r15
--- Comment #16 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 15:13 ---
Works: 2009-07-24-r150035
Fails: 2009-07-29-r150196
(Both trees were _not_ clean, but the first has the same patches as the second
one, plus one more - thus, it is rather likely that the regression range is
still co
--- Comment #15 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-19 13:54 ---
> I just checked r150724, which also fails. This means that both my guesses were
> wrong. But at least it bring us down to the range 147438:150724 (which is
> still
> three months of development).
I don't have acce
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:46 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> > I keep forgetting this test!-(on i686-apple-darwin9, it compiles at revision
> > 147438, 20090512, and fails at revision 150825, 20090817).
>
> That's a start. I can see two (hypothetica
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 13:21 ---
> I keep forgetting this test!-(on i686-apple-darwin9, it compiles at revision
> 147438, 20090512, and fails at revision 150825, 20090817).
That's a start. I can see two (hypothetical) candidates in this range:
*
--- Comment #12 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-19 13:06 ---
> When searching for the origin of the regression, one should use the test case
> in comment #3 and look at the 4.5 trunk.
I keep forgetting this test!-(on i686-apple-darwin9, it compiles at revision
147438, 2009051
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 12:51 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> AFAICR the problem is specific to the fortran-dev branch.
No, this is definitely not the case! Only the failure of comment #0 is specific
to the branch. However, this failure is caused by
--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-19 12:33 ---
> I decided to take a look at this during lunchtime today. The source that I
> had
> to hand is the 20091203 4.5.0 snapshot. To my astonishment, this does not
> show
> the problem. I have had a quick look at the
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-19 12:12 ---
I decided to take a look at this during lunchtime today. The source that I had
to hand is the 20091203 4.5.0 snapshot. To my astonishment, this does not show
the problem. I have had a quick look at the intervening g
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-18 18:30 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > What about pr42274? Is it a duplicate or not?
>
> I don't think so.
>
My patch fixes pr42274 comment #9 but not the main part of it. Janus is quite
right that
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-18 17:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=20410)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20410&action=view)
Fix for the problem
This needs to be regtested but I believe it to be bombproof.
However, I should attempt to fi
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-18 16:42 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> What about pr42274? Is it a duplicate or not?
I don't think so.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43227
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-18 16:18 ---
What about pr42274? Is it a duplicate or not?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43227
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-18 11:48 ---
Marked as a 4.5/4.6 regression.
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
23 matches
Mail list logo
