[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-26 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Version|unknown

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-26 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 --- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-09-26 12:30:57 UTC --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Sep 26 12:30:54 2010 New Revision: 164631 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164631 Log: 2010-09-26 Jerry DeLisle PR fortran/457

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-26 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-26 Thread kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 --- Comment #7 from Kazumoto Kojima 2010-09-26 07:41:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > does this patch fix the problem for you? Yes. I've confirmed that all fortran regressions on sh4-unknown-linux-gnu go away with your patch in #5.

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-25 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 --- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-09-26 04:17:19 UTC --- The patch in comment 5 regression tests fine on x86-64. Kazumoto Kojima, does this patch fix the problem for you?

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-25 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 --- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-09-26 03:39:17 UTC --- This patch untested gets rid of the valgrind error I was seeing. Index: module.c === --- module.c(revision 164621)

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-25 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 --- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-09-26 03:33:09 UTC --- This is the same location I was seeing the failure before. Now I have no segfault, but valgind shows: ==17145== 48 (32 direct, 16 indirect) bytes in 2 blocks are definitely lost in lo

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-25 Thread kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 Kazumoto Kojima changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-25 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/45793] [4.6 Regressions] Numerous test-suite failures

2010-09-25 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45793 --- Comment #1 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-09-25 20:01:14 UTC --- Others can not confirm this so I am checking local configuration.