The root cause for SEGV in evaluating fortran function call, any solution or suggestion?

[Jim Blandy]

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 11:42:36PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
>> The types in the debug information should not reflect the extra level
>> of indirection; the fact that they're passed by reference is just part
>> of the meaning of a Fortran function call.  But the location
>> expression should encode the extra level of indirection.
>
> This seems perfectly sensible to me.  But the example Wu posted earlier
> does not agree: today gfortran apparently puts out the indirections
> explicitly.

You're talking about this, where 'm' is declared as 'integer', right?

 <1><da>: Abbrev Number: 7 (DW_TAG_subprogram)
     DW_AT_sibling     : <10f>
     DW_AT_external    : 1
     DW_AT_name        : res_
     DW_AT_decl_file   : 1
     DW_AT_decl_line   : 23
     DW_AT_type        : <bb>
     DW_AT_low_pc      : 0x804863f
     DW_AT_high_pc     : 0x8048655
     DW_AT_frame_base  : 1 byte block: 55       (DW_OP_reg5)
 <2><f5>: Abbrev Number: 8 (DW_TAG_formal_parameter)
     DW_AT_name        : m
     DW_AT_type        : <10f>   =====> This is a const pointer to integer
     DW_AT_artificial  : 1
     DW_AT_location    : 2 byte block: 91 8     (DW_OP_fbreg: 8)

 <1><10f>: Abbrev Number: 9 (DW_TAG_const_type)
     DW_AT_type        : <114>
 <1><114>: Abbrev Number: 10 (DW_TAG_pointer_type)
     DW_AT_byte_size   : 4
     DW_AT_type        : <bb>
 <1><bb>: Abbrev Number: 6 (DW_TAG_base_type)
     DW_AT_name        : integer
     DW_AT_byte_size   : 4
     DW_AT_encoding    : 5      (signed)

> So it sounds like gfortran will need to be fixed.

Yep.  The types in the Dwarf information should match the types as
they appear in the source language.