[Patch, fortran] PR91926 - assumed rank optional

[Tobias Burnus]

See also: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92027
for a tracking bug – I just added also some analysis.

Tobias

PS: A better patch submission, with the actual patch attached, would 
have been nice. Please re-post the committed patch – and the new patch, 
which fixes the fall out. – Thanks!

On 10/9/19 12:26 PM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> Thanks for flagging this up - I am back at base on Saturday and will
> take it up then.
>
> Regards
>
> Paul
>
> On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 11:13, Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 5 Oct 2019 at 20:31, Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.thomas@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  <pault@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  <pault@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  <pault@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
>>
>