> From: Thomas Koenig via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> > Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 15:59:45 +0200
> Hi Mikael, > > > Ping for the four patches starting at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057759.html : > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057757.html > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057760.html > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057758.html > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-April/057761.html > > > > Richi accepted the general direction and the middle-end interaction. > > I need a fortran frontend ack as well. > > Looks good to me. > > Thanks a lot for taking this on! This would have been a serious > regression if released with gcc 12. > > Best regards > > Thomas These, or specifically r12-8227-g89ca0fffa48b79, "fortran: Pre-evaluate string pointers. [PR102043]" have further exposed (the issue existed before but now fails for more platforms) PR78054 "gfortran.dg/pr70673.f90 FAILs at -O0", at least for cris-elf and apparently also s390x-ibm-linux-gnu. In the PR it is mentioned that running the test through valgrind shows invalid accesses also on x86_64-linux-gnu. Could it be that the test-case is invalid and has undefined behavior? I don't know fortran so I can't tell. That exact commit causing a regression for s390x is somewhat an assumption based on posted date and testresults, as the s390x results don't include a git version. (@Stefansf: I'm referring to https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2022-April/760060.html https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2022-April/760137.html Perhaps that tester isn't using the contrib/gcc_update and contrib/test_summary scripts, thus no LAST_UPDATED included?) brgds, H-P
