Hi Tobias,
I see. Then OK for trunk by me.
- Andre
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:35:53 +0200
Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> On 9/16/20 9:58 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
> > + st->n.sym = NULL;
> >
> > Don't we need free or unlink the st node from the symtree, too?
>
> I did not see a w
Hi Andre,
On 9/16/20 9:58 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
+ st->n.sym = NULL;
Don't we need free or unlink the st node from the symtree, too?
I did not see a way to simply remove a single symtree; as this
is the error case, I left the item in the symtree.
The symtree itself is removed when
Hi Tobias,
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/decl.c b/gcc/fortran/decl.c
index c612b492f3e..326e6f5db7a 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/decl.c
@@ -9819,6 +9819,15 @@ gfc_match_submod_proc (void)
if (gfc_match_eos () != MATCH_YES)
{
+ /* Unset st->n.sym. Note: in reject_stat
Early Fortran-review ping.
Solves:
PR 96041 - [11 regression] ICE in gfortran.dg/pr93423.f90 after r11-1792
(opened 2020-07-03)
The other PR revealed/caused the issue:
PR 93423 - [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on invalid with argument list for module
procedure
"Backports will have to wait until PR9
The testcase for PR93423 did a double free, which caused
an ICE. That's reported in PR96041.
Slightly frustrated by the FAIL in the testsuite,
I decided to debug and, hopefully, fix this.
The problem is related to putting the symtree
into a sub namespace of the symbol's ns. That's fixed up
by co
