Re: [PATCH] fortran: Create a dedicated type for ranks and array dimensions
Thomas Schwinge <[email protected]> Fri, 24 Jul 2026 17:25:52 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gcc.patches,gmane.comp.gcc.fortran |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Mikael! On 2026-07-21T17:04:28+0200, Mikael Morin <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 20/07/2026 =C3=A0 20:23, Thomas Schwinge a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >> On 2026-07-08T11:14:38+0200, Mikael Morin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Le 06/07/2026 =C3=A0 22:02, Harald Anlauf a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >>>> On 7/6/26 11:35, Mikael Morin wrote: >>>>> This started as [...], but I eventually >>>>> convinced myself that the snippet above showed a lack of a type readi= ly >>>>> available to represent ranks and array dimensions.=C2=A0 This patchs = adds >>>>> such a type. >>=20 >> Nice work! >>=20 >> I had reason to look into what this patch is doing (details to be sent >> later; just quickly: your patch appears to have uncovered a latent issue >> in generic GCC middle end, resulting in ICEs for certain targets)=20 > Is there a PR for it? Now there is: <https://gcc.gnu.org/PR126392> "'GIMPLE_SWITCH' lowering for 'INTEGER_TYPE' subrange wrappers vs. targets = without 'casesi'/'tablejump'", and patch: <https://inbox.sourceware.org/[email protected]= om> "In 'range_check_type', peel off 'INTEGER_TYPE' subrange wrappers [PR126392= ]". Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe Thomas >> -- so I >> therefore attempted to have a quick look there, whether that's the same >> issue: >>=20 >>> I received an aarch64 regression notification from the linaro CI bot, >>> but could not reproduce it, so I will push the patch as submitted [...] >>=20 >> I assume you mean the one linked from >> <https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/patch/65a3d4ec-5476-44bf-8= [email protected]/>: >> "linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_simplebootstrap_build--master-aarch64-bootstrap", >> "Check": "fail", "Description": "Build failed"?=20 > Yes. > >> I traced that one down >> per the artifacts/log files they link to, and the failure was good ol' >> "[...] fatal error: error writing to [...]: No space left on device", so >> indeed nothing for you to worry about. ;-) > Thanks. That's the tip I was missing. The error is easy to find if one= =20 > searches for "No space left".