[PATCH] Fortran: copy-out for possibly missing OPTIONAL CLASS arguments [PR112772]

2023-11-30 Thread Harald Anlauf
Dear all,

the attached rather obvious patch fixes the first testcase of pr112772:
we unconditionally generated copy-out code for optional class arguments,
while the copy-in properly checked the presence of arguments.

Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline?

(The second testcase is a different issue.)

Thanks,
Harald

From 38433016def0337a72cb0ef0029cd2c05d702282 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Harald Anlauf 
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 21:53:21 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fortran: copy-out for possibly missing OPTIONAL CLASS
 arguments [PR112772]

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

	PR fortran/112772
	* trans-expr.cc (gfc_conv_class_to_class): Make copy-out conditional
	on the presence of an OPTIONAL CLASS argument passed to an OPTIONAL
	CLASS dummy.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	PR fortran/112772
	* gfortran.dg/missing_optional_dummy_7.f90: New test.
---
 gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc |  9 +++
 .../gfortran.dg/missing_optional_dummy_7.f90  | 64 +++
 2 files changed, 73 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/missing_optional_dummy_7.f90

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc
index bfe9996ced6..6a47af39c57 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc
@@ -1365,6 +1365,15 @@ gfc_conv_class_to_class (gfc_se *parmse, gfc_expr *e, gfc_typespec class_ts,
   tmp = build3_loc (input_location, COND_EXPR, void_type_node,
 			cond, tmp, tmp2);
   gfc_add_expr_to_block (>pre, tmp);
+
+  if (!elemental && full_array && copyback)
+	{
+	  tmp2 = build_empty_stmt (input_location);
+	  tmp = gfc_finish_block (>post);
+	  tmp = build3_loc (input_location, COND_EXPR, void_type_node,
+			cond, tmp, tmp2);
+	  gfc_add_expr_to_block (>post, tmp);
+	}
 }
   else
 gfc_add_block_to_block (>pre, );
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/missing_optional_dummy_7.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/missing_optional_dummy_7.f90
new file mode 100644
index 000..ad9ecd8f2b6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/missing_optional_dummy_7.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+! { dg-do run }
+! PR fortran/112772 - test absent OPTIONAL, ALLOCATABLE/POINTER class dummies
+
+program main
+  implicit none
+  type t
+  end type t
+  call test_c_a ()
+  call test_u_a ()
+  call test_c_p ()
+  call test_u_p ()
+contains
+  ! class, allocatable
+  subroutine test_c_a (msg1)
+class(t), optional, allocatable :: msg1(:)
+if (present (msg1)) stop 1
+call assert_c_a ()
+call assert_c_a (msg1)
+  end
+
+  subroutine assert_c_a (msg2)
+class(t), optional, allocatable :: msg2(:)
+if (present (msg2)) stop 2
+  end
+
+  ! unlimited polymorphic, allocatable
+  subroutine test_u_a (msg1)
+class(*), optional, allocatable :: msg1(:)
+if (present (msg1)) stop 3
+call assert_u_a ()
+call assert_u_a (msg1)
+  end
+
+  subroutine assert_u_a (msg2)
+class(*), optional, allocatable :: msg2(:)
+if (present (msg2)) stop 4
+  end
+
+  ! class, pointer
+  subroutine test_c_p (msg1)
+class(t), optional, pointer :: msg1(:)
+if (present (msg1)) stop 5
+call assert_c_p ()
+call assert_c_p (msg1)
+  end
+
+  subroutine assert_c_p (msg2)
+class(t), optional, pointer :: msg2(:)
+if (present (msg2)) stop 6
+  end
+
+  ! unlimited polymorphic, pointer
+  subroutine test_u_p (msg1)
+class(*), optional, pointer :: msg1(:)
+if (present (msg1)) stop 7
+call assert_u_p ()
+call assert_u_p (msg1)
+  end
+
+  subroutine assert_u_p (msg2)
+class(*), optional, pointer :: msg2(:)
+if (present (msg2)) stop 8
+  end
+end
--
2.35.3



Re: [PATCH] Fortran: fix TARGET attribute of associating entity in ASSOCIATE [PR112764]

2023-11-30 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
Hi Harald,

The original testcase is accepted by the two other brands to which I have
access.

OK for mainline and, I would suggest, 13-branch.

Thanks

Paul


On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 21:16, Harald Anlauf  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> the attached simple patch fixes the handling of the TARGET
> attribute of an associate variable in an ASSOCIATE construct.
>
> See e.g. F2018:11.1.3.3 for a standard reference.
>
> (Note that the patch does not touch the pointer or allocatable
> attributes, as that would lead to several testsuite regressions
> and thus needs more work.)
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline?
>
> Thanks,
> Harald
>
>