------- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-09 18:31 -------
Confirm. Seems to be introduced between 2008-04-03-r133863 and
2008-03-27-r133632. I tried to reduce the test case -- and I failed. I think
somewhere the memory gets corrupted.
==1454== Invalid read of size 2
==1454== at 0x5CEB69: fold_binary (fold-const.c:9920)
==1454== by 0x5D8188: fold_build2_stat (fold-const.c:13441)
==1454== by 0x4A7752: gfc_conv_expr_op (trans-expr.c:1229)
==1454== by 0x4A6117: gfc_conv_expr_val (trans-expr.c:3612)
==1454== by 0x4A986B: gfc_conv_intrinsic_function_args
(trans-intrinsic.c:193)
==1454== by 0x4B13A0: gfc_conv_intrinsic_minmax (trans-intrinsic.c:1442)
==1454== by 0x4B27F0: gfc_conv_intrinsic_function (trans-intrinsic.c:4309)
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC host triplet|i386-apple-darwin9.2.2 |
GCC target triplet|i386-apple-darwin9.2.2 |
Keywords| |ice-on-valid-code
Known to fail| |4.4.0
Known to work| |4.3.0 4.2.3
Priority|P3 |P4
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2008-04-09 18:31:35
date| |
Summary|gfortran dies on file |[4.4 regression] gfortran
|containing module and common|dies on file containing
| |module and common
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35892
