http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41936
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
Is the following patch OK?
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c 2014-04-30 21:41:33.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c 2014-05-04 00:42:50.000000000 +0200
@@ -6504,6 +6504,20 @@ gfc_conv_expr_reference (gfc_se * se, gf
/* Take the address of that value. */
se->expr = gfc_build_addr_expr (NULL_TREE, var);
+ if (expr->ts.type == BT_DERIVED && expr->rank
+ && !gfc_is_finalizable (expr->ts.u.derived, NULL)
+ && expr->ts.u.derived->attr.alloc_comp
+ && expr->expr_type != EXPR_VARIABLE)
+ {
+ tree tmp;
+
+ tmp = build_fold_indirect_ref_loc (input_location, se->expr);
+ tmp = gfc_deallocate_alloc_comp (expr->ts.u.derived, tmp, expr->rank);
+
+ /* The components shall be deallocated before
+ their containing entity. */
+ gfc_prepend_expr_to_block (&se->post, tmp);
+ }
}
It fixes the memory leaks for the test in comment 0 and for
gfortran.dg/class_array_15.f03, but not pr55603 nor pr60913.
Is the following change for gfortran.dg/class_array_15.f03
--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_array_15.f03 2013-01-06
22:34:50.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_array_15.f03 2014-05-04
10:24:06.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
! { dg-do run }
+! { dg-options "-fdump-tree-original" }
!
! Tests the fixes for three bugs with the same underlying cause. All are
regressions
! that come about because class array elements end up with a different tree
type
@@ -114,3 +115,5 @@ subroutine pr54992 ! This test remains
bh => bhGet(b,instance=2)
if (loc (b) .ne. loc(bh%hostNode)) call abort
end
+! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "builtin_free" 12 "original" } }
+! { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "original" } }
enough (there are only 11 builtin_free without the patch)? or should I add the
test in comment 0 (15 builtin_free with the patch, 12 without)?
