Hi,
On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 20:31, Paul Richard Thomas < paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > I must apologise not posting this before committing. I left for a > vacation this morning and I thought that this problem and the one > posted by Gilles were best fixed before departing. The patch only > touches the new ISO_Fortran binding feature and so I thought that I > would be safe to do this. > > It was fully regtested and only applies to trunk. > > Paul > > Author: pault > Date: Sat Oct 5 08:17:55 2019 > New Revision: 276624 > > URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276624&root=gcc&view=rev > Log: > 2019-10-05 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org> > > PR fortran/91926 > * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_gfc_desc_to_cfi_desc): Correct the > assignment of the attribute field to account correctly for an > assumed shape dummy. Assign separately to the gfc and cfi > descriptors since the atribute can be different. Add btanch to > correctly handle missing optional dummies. > > 2019-10-05 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org> > > PR fortran/91926 > * gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.f90 : New test. > * gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.c : Additional source. > * gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_14.f90 : New test. > > 2019-10-05 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org> > > PR fortran/91926 > * runtime/ISO_Fortran_binding.c (cfi_desc_to_gfc_desc): Do not > modify the bounds and offset for CFI_other. > > Added: > trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.c > trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_13.f90 > trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_14.f90 > Modified: > trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog > trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c > trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog > trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog > trunk/libgfortran/runtime/ISO_Fortran_binding.c > Since this was committed (r276624), I have noticed regressions on arm-linux-gnueabihf: FAIL: gfortran.dg/ISO_Fortran_binding_11.f90 -O3 -g execution test I've seen other reports on gcc-testresults too. Christophe
