[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #12 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Testing for F2008:C631 is fixed on truck.
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 Bug 82934 depends on bug 83318, which changed state. Bug 83318 Summary: Illegal program causes internal compiler error with tags gfc_trans_allocate, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:5646 and Aborted (program f951) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83318 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #11 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Sat Dec 9 19:53:55 2017 New Revision: 255524 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255524&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-12-09 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/82934 PR fortran/83318 * match.c (gfc_match_allocate): Enforce F2008:C631. 2017-12-09 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/82934 PR fortran/83318 * gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_2.f90: new test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_2.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/match.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl --- On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 01:14:44AM +, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote: > > I don't know how I missed F2008:C631 > > C631 (R626) A type-param-value in a type-spec shall be an asterisk if >and only if each allocate-object is a dummy argument for which the >corresponding type parameter is assumed. > > This is going to make the fix for 83318 real ugly. > character(len=42), allocatable :: foo character(len=22), allocatable :: foofoo call alloc( foo , foofoo) if (len(foo) .ne. 42) call abort if (len(foofoo) .ne. 22) call abort contains subroutine alloc( bar, barbar ) character(len=*), allocatable :: bar character(len=22), allocatable :: barbar allocate(character(len=*) :: bar , barbar) ! <= Here! end subroutine end gfcx z a.f90 f951: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault 0xb5af0f crash_signal ../../gcc/gcc/toplev.c:325 0x75eb9a gfc_dep_compare_expr(gfc_expr*, gfc_expr*) ../../gcc/gcc/fortran/dependency.c:363 0x741636 resolve_allocate_expr ../../gcc/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:7487 0x741636 resolve_allocate_deallocate ../../gcc/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:7879 0x733115 gfc_resolve_code(gfc_code*, gfc_namespace*) ../../gcc/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:11314 0x735b4f resolve_codes ../../gcc/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:16433
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl --- On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:52:31AM +, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 > > --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- > On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:29:50AM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > > allocate( character(len=*) :: bar ) > > > > However, the type-spec in the allocate statement does coincide with > > s/does/does not > > > the declaration of a dummy argument, or appear in SELECT TYPE, or > > in the declaration of a named constant. The * cannot appear here. > > > >end subroutine > Is it the weekend yet? :( I don't know how I missed F2008:C631 C631 (R626) A type-param-value in a type-spec shall be an asterisk if and only if each allocate-object is a dummy argument for which the corresponding type parameter is assumed. This is going to make the fix for 83318 real ugly.
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:29:50AM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > allocate( character(len=*) :: bar ) > > However, the type-spec in the allocate statement does coincide with s/does/does not > the declaration of a dummy argument, or appear in SELECT TYPE, or > in the declaration of a named constant. The * cannot appear here. > >end subroutine
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|ice-on-valid-code | Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org Depends on||83318 Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- I believe that this code is invalid Fortran. Fortran 2008 states An asterisk as a type-param-value specifies that a length type parameter is an assumed type parameter. It is used for a dummy argument to assume the type parameter value from the effective argument, for an associate name in a SELECT TYPE construct to assume the type parameter value from the corresponding selector, and for a named constant of type character to assume the character length from the constant-expr . In this code, subroutine alloc( bar ) character(len=*), allocatable :: bar bar is the dummy argument, so a type-spec with * can appear here. allocate( character(len=*) :: bar ) However, the type-spec in the allocate statement does coincide with the declaration of a dummy argument, or appear in SELECT TYPE, or in the declaration of a named constant. The * cannot appear here. end subroutine The correct subroutine is simply subroutine alloc( bar ) character(len=*), allocatable :: bar allocate( bar ) end subroutine It's not clear to me if Paul's patch needs to be removed as it appears to set a possibly dangling pointer to NULL Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83318 [Bug 83318] Illegal program causes internal compiler error with tags gfc_trans_allocate, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:5646 and Aborted (program f951)
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas --- This is now fixed on all three branches. Thanks to self for reporting it :-) Paul
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Tue Nov 14 17:38:38 2017 New Revision: 254733 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254733&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-11-13 Paul Thomas Backport from trunk PR fortran/82934 * trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_allocate): Remove the gcc_assert on null string length for assumed length typespec and set expr3_esize to NULL_TREE; 2017-11-13 Paul Thomas Backport from trunk PR fortran/82934 * gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_1.f90: New test. Added: branches/gcc-6-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_1.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-6-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-6-branch/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c branches/gcc-6-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Mon Nov 13 20:46:08 2017 New Revision: 254709 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254709&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-11-13 Paul Thomas Backport from trunk PR fortran/82934 * trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_allocate): Remove the gcc_assert on null string length for assumed length typespec and set expr3_esize to NULL_TREE; 2017-11-13 Paul Thomas Backport from trunk PR fortran/82934 * gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_1.f90: New test. Added: branches/gcc-7-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_1.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-7-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-7-branch/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c branches/gcc-7-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1) > The test gives the expected result with gfortran 4.8 and 4.9. The change in > behavior occurred between revisions r221412 + 3 patches (2015-03-13, works) > and r2214164 + 3 patches (2015-03-16, ICE). Oddly, the fortran ChangeLog shows nothing between these dates that one could implicate. As you will see, the fix was trivial. I am just about to post it on the list and will apply it to 6- and 7-branches over the weekend. Even if not a regression, it does prevent an ICE in a particularly robust way :-) Thanks for investigating. Paul
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Fri Nov 10 12:24:24 2017 New Revision: 254624 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254624&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2017-11-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/82934 * trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_allocate): Remove the gcc_assert on null string length for assumed length typespec and set expr3_esize to NULL_TREE; 2017-11-10 Paul Thomas PR fortran/82934 * gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_1.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/allocate_assumed_charlen_1.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/82934] [6/7/8 Regression] Segfault on assumed character length in allocate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82934 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to work||4.9.3 Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Last reconfirmed||2017-11-10 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Summary|Segfault on assumed |[6/7/8 Regression] Segfault |character length in |on assumed character length |allocate|in allocate Known to fail||5.5.0, 6.4.0, 7.2.0, 8.0 --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The test gives the expected result with gfortran 4.8 and 4.9. The change in behavior occurred between revisions r221412 + 3 patches (2015-03-13, works) and r2214164 + 3 patches (2015-03-16, ICE).
