PING ! On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:26:24 +0100 Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi all, > > unfortunately was my last patch for pr67451 not perfect and introduced > regressions occurring on s390(x) and with the sanitizer. These were > caused, because when taking the array specs from the source=-expression > also its attributes, like coarray state and so on where taken from > there. This additionally added a corank to local objects to allocate, > that were no coarrays overwriting data in the array handle. The attached > patch fixes both issues. > > The patch for gcc-5 is not affected, because in gcc-5 the feature of > taking the array spec from the source=-expression is not implemented. > > Bootstrapped and regtested ok on x86_64-linux-gnu/F23. > > Ok for trunk? > > Regards, > Andre > > On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 19:24:46 +0100 > Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Andre, > > > > This looks to be OK for trunk. > > > > I'll move to the 5-branch patch right away. > > > > Thanks > > > > Paul > > > > On 29 January 2016 at 19:17, Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > attached is a patch to fix a regression in current gfortran when a > > > coarray is used in the source=-expression of an allocate(). The ICE was > > > caused by the class information, i.e., _vptr and so on, not at the > > > expected place. The patch fixes this. > > > > > > The patch also fixes pr69418, which I will flag as a duplicate in a > > > second. > > > > > > Bootstrapped and regtested ok on x86_64-linux-gnu/F23. > > > > > > Ok for trunk? > > > > > > Backport to gcc-5 is pending, albeit more difficult, because the > > > allocate() implementation on 5 is not as advanced the one in 6. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Andre > > > -- > > > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de > > > > > > > > -- Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
