Re: José's pending bind(C) patches / status (was: Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid)

2021-10-22 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches 

Hi Tobias, José,

Am 22.10.21 um 15:06 schrieb Tobias Burnus:


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055982.html


PR100245 - ICE on automatic reallocation.
Still ICEs

TODO: Review patch.


this one works and LGTM.

Thanks for the patch!

Harald

Re: José's pending bind(C) patches / status (was: Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid)

2021-10-22 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches 

Hi Tobias, José,

Am 22.10.21 um 15:06 schrieb Tobias Burnus:


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055949.html


PR100136 - ICE, regression, using flag -fcheck=pointer

First testcase has an ICE with -fcheck=pointer
Second testcase has always an ICE + possibly missing func.

TODO: Review patch – and probably: follow-up patch for remaining issue


I think this LGTM.

Thanks for the patch!

Harald

Re: José's pending bind(C) patches / status (was: Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid)

2021-10-22 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches 

Hi Tobias,

Am 22.10.21 um 15:06 schrieb Tobias Burnus:


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055934.html


PR100103 - Automatic reallocation fails inside select rank
Still segfaults at runtime for 'that = a' where the RHS is a parameter
and the LHS an allocatable assumed-rank array (inside select rank).

TODO: Review patch


this one LGTM.

Thanks for the patch!

Harald

Re: José's pending bind(C) patches / status (was: Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid)

2021-10-22 Thread Tobias Burnus 

Hi José, hi Fortraners,

triage of all listed patches:


On 21.06.21 17:21, José Rui Faustino de Sousa wrote:

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055924.html


PR100040 - Wrong code with intent out assumed-rank allocatable
PR100029 - ICE on subroutine call with allocatable polymorphic
→ Both: Still occurs, ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status

TODO: Review patch.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055933.html


PR100097 - Unlimited polymorphic pointers and allocatables have incorrect rank
PR100098 - Polymorphic pointers and allocatables have incorrect rank
→ Both: PASS

TODO: Check whether it makes sense to apply the testcase
TODO: Close PRs
→ See also patch below (2021-June/056169.html)


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056168.html


PR96870 - Class name on error message
→ Fixed with sufficient test coverage; thus, I closed the PR.

Nothing to be done.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056167.html


PR96724 - Bogus warnings with the repeat intrinsic and the flag 
-Wconversion-extra|  repeat ('x', NCOPIES=i08) ! i08 is 20_1 shows: Warning: 
Conversion
from INTEGER(1) to INTEGER(8) at (1) [-Wconversion-extra] TODO: Review
patch. |


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056163.html


Bug 93308 - bind(c) subroutine changes lower bound of array argument in caller
Bug 93963 - Select rank mishandling allocatable and pointer arguments with 
bind(c)
Bug 94327 - Bind(c) argument attributes are incorrectly set
Bug 94331 - Bind(C) corrupts array descriptors
Bug 97046 - Bad interaction between lbound/ubound, allocatable arrays and 
bind(C) subroutine with dimension(..) parameter
→ All already closed as FIXED

TODO: Nothing, unless we want to pick one of the testcases.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056162.html


PR94104 - Request for diagnostic improvement
   10 |   print *, sumf(a)
  |1
Error: Actual argument for ‘a’ must be a pointer at (1)
NOTE: as the dummy is intent(in), since F2008 alternatively a TARGET attr would 
be also okay.

TODO: Review patch - in principle, I am fine with the but I am not sure the
'valid target' in the error message is clear enough. Might require some message 
tweaking
for clarity.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056155.html


Gerald's PR100948 - [12 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_expr_val, at 
fortran/trans-expr.c:9069
Still has an ICE.

TODO: Review patch.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056154.html


Bug 100906 - Bind(c): failure handling character with len/=1
→ Testcase now passes.
Bug 100907 - Bind(c): failure handling wide character
→ I think now okay – but the testcase assumes elem_len/sizeof(char) == #chars
  but for the C descriptor, elem_len / sizeof(char-type) = #chars
  Thus, sz is not 1 or 7 bytes but 4 or 28 bytes (or 1/7 characters)
Bug 100911 - Bind(c): failure handling C_PTR
→ Closed as FIXED.
Bug 100914 - Bind(c): errors handling complex
→ Closed as FIXED
Bug 100915 - Bind(c): failure handling C_FUNPTR
→ Closed as FIXED
Bug 100916 - Bind(c): CFI_type_other unimplemented
→ Bogus testcase (for 't(ype)' argument) otherwise it expects
  CFI_type_other instead of CFI_type_struct (TODO: Is that sensible?)

TODO: Check whether a testcase is needed
TODO: Close the three still open PRs


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056152.html


Bug 101047 - Pointer explicit initialization fails
Bug 101048 - Class pointer explicit initialization refuses valid
  ..., pointer, save :: ptr => tgt
fails to associate ptr with tgt
(wrong-code + rejects valid)

TODO: Review patch.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056159.html


PR92621 - Problems with memory handling with allocatable intent(out) arrays 
with bind(c)

I think mostly fixed by my big bind(C) patch, but there still one ICE
with '-fcheck=all -fsanitize=undefined'

TODO: Fix that bug  (unlikely to be fixed by José's patch)
TODO: Check whether testcase should be added
and then close the PR


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055982.html


PR100245 - ICE on automatic reallocation.
Still ICEs

TODO: Review patch.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055949.html


PR100136 - ICE, regression, using flag -fcheck=pointer

First testcase has an ICE with -fcheck=pointer
Second testcase has always an ICE + possibly missing func.

TODO: Review patch – and probably: follow-up patch for remaining issue


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055946.html


PR100132 - Optimization breaks pointer association.
'fn spec' is wrong :-(

TODO: Review patch!


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055934.html


PR100103 - Automatic reallocation fails inside select rank
Still segfaults at runtime for 'that = a' where the RHS is a parameter
and the LHS an allocatable assumed-rank array (inside select rank).

TODO: Review patch


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056169.html


PR100097 - Unlimited polymorphic pointers a

Re: José's pending bind(C) patches / status (was: Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid)

2021-10-22 Thread Paul Richard Thomas via Gcc-patches 
Hi Tobias,

My disappearance is partly responsible for the backlog. I told José that I
would start working on it some months since but just have not had the time.
I can do some of the reviews but still do not have much time to spare.
Perhaps you could divide them up between us.

Andrew Benson has been working on some standards issues associated with a
patch of mine that sorts out finalization for intrinsic assignment -
PR64290. The main issue was that of finalization of finalizable
types/classes that themselves have finalizable array components. I believe
that the patch has it right, following a comparison between the
(differing!) behaviour of other brands. We have also found a case where
gfortran, with the patch applied, that still does not finalize when it
should. I will work up a fix for this and will coordinate with Andrew to
produce testcases as necessary, well before 15th November.

Best regards

Paul


On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 08:42, Tobias Burnus  wrote:

> Hi José, hi all,
>
> especially since my patch which moved the descriptor conversion from
> libgfortran to gfortran is in, I wonder whether there are still patches
> to be applied and useful testcases; I assume there are more issues in
> Bugzilla, especially as I filled myself some (often related to
> polymorphism or assumed rank). While I (and also Sandra) try to resolve
> some bugs and look at testcases:
>
> it would be helpful if others – in particular José – could check
> whether: (a) PRs can be now closed, (b) testcases exist which still
> should be added, (c) patches exist which still are applicable (even if
> they need to be revised). (Partial/full list below.)
>
> I hope that we can really cleanup this backlog – and possibly fix also
> some of the remaining bugs before GCC 12 is released!
>
> And kudos to José for the bug reports, testcases and patches – and sorry
> for slow reviews. I hope we resolve the pending issues and be quicker in
> future.
>
> Tobias
>
> PS: Old and probably current but incomplete pending patch list:
>
> On 21.06.21 17:21, José Rui Faustino de Sousa wrote:
> > On 21/06/21 12:37, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> >> Thus: Do you have a list of patches pending review?
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055924.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055933.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056168.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056167.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056163.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056162.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056155.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056154.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056152.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056159.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055982.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055949.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055946.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055934.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056169.html
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055921.html
> >
> > I am not 100% sure this is all of them but it should be most.
> -
> Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201,
> 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer:
> Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München;
> Registergericht München, HRB 106955
>


-- 
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" -
Albert Einstein

José's pending bind(C) patches / status (was: Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid)

2021-10-22 Thread Tobias Burnus 

Hi José, hi all,

especially since my patch which moved the descriptor conversion from
libgfortran to gfortran is in, I wonder whether there are still patches
to be applied and useful testcases; I assume there are more issues in
Bugzilla, especially as I filled myself some (often related to
polymorphism or assumed rank). While I (and also Sandra) try to resolve
some bugs and look at testcases:

it would be helpful if others – in particular José – could check
whether: (a) PRs can be now closed, (b) testcases exist which still
should be added, (c) patches exist which still are applicable (even if
they need to be revised). (Partial/full list below.)

I hope that we can really cleanup this backlog – and possibly fix also
some of the remaining bugs before GCC 12 is released!

And kudos to José for the bug reports, testcases and patches – and sorry
for slow reviews. I hope we resolve the pending issues and be quicker in
future.

Tobias

PS: Old and probably current but incomplete pending patch list:

On 21.06.21 17:21, José Rui Faustino de Sousa wrote:

On 21/06/21 12:37, Tobias Burnus wrote:

Thus: Do you have a list of patches pending review?


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055924.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055933.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056168.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056167.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056163.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056162.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056155.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056154.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056152.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056159.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055982.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055949.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055946.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055934.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056169.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055921.html

I am not 100% sure this is all of them but it should be most.

-
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 
München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas 
Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht 
München, HRB 106955

Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid (list of pending patches)

2021-06-23 Thread dhumieres.dominique--- via Gcc-patches 

Hi José,


> Thus: Do you have a list of patches pending review?



https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055924.html


PRs 100029 and 100040. I have the patch in my working tree
for a long time. It works as expected. OK to commit.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055933.html


PRs 100097 and 100098. New patch at

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056169.html

OK to commit the new patch.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056168.html


PR 96870.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056167.html


PR 96724. OK to commit.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056163.html


PRs 93308, 93963, 94327, 94331, and 97046.
Already OKed at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056184.html
and
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056193.html


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056162.html


PR 94104.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056155.html


PR 100948.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056154.html


PRs 100906, 100907, 100911, 100914, 100915, and 100916.
Tis patch works for me when applied to GCC12 (not GCC11)
but seems to conflict with the patch for
PRs 93308, 93963, 94327, 94331, and 97046.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056152.html


PR 10148.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056159.html


PR 92621.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055982.html


PR 100245.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055949.html


PR 100136.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055946.html


PR 100132.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055934.html


PR 100103.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056169.html


PRs 100097 and 100098. OK for me.


https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055921.html


PRs 100024 and 100025. OK for me.

Thanks for the great work, but please don't forget to mark the PRs
as ASSIGNED and don't hesitate to PING after a week.

Dominique

Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid

2021-06-21 Thread José Rui Faustino de Sousa via Gcc-patches 

Hi Tobias,

On 21/06/21 12:37, Tobias Burnus wrote:

Thus: Do you have a list of patches pending review?

>

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055924.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055933.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056168.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056167.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056163.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056162.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056155.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056154.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056152.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056159.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055982.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055949.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055946.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055934.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-June/056169.html

https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055921.html

I am not 100% sure this is all of them but it should be most.


Secondly, I assume
you can commit or do you have commit issues?



Up to now there were no problems.

Best regards,
José Rui

Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid

2021-06-21 Thread Tobias Burnus 

Hi José,

On 17.06.21 21:34, José Rui Faustino de Sousa via Gcc-patches wrote:

Update to a proposed patch to:
PR100683 - Array initialization refuses valid
due to more errors being found...

Patch tested only on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.

LGTM – sorry for the very belated review.

Add call to simplify expression before parsing

Nit: I think you mean resolving/processing/expanding/checking – as
gfc_resolve_expr comes after the actual parsing.

*and* check *appropriately* if the expression is still an array after
simplification.


 * * *

I have to admit that I got a bit lost with your patches. Are there still
outstanding patches? I also recall approving a patch quite some time ago
which was then not committed for a long time. (I have not checked
whether it was committed by now.)

Thus: Do you have a list of patches pending review? Secondly, I assume
you can commit or do you have commit issues?

Tobias


Fortran: Fix bogus error

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/100683
* resolve.c (gfc_resolve_expr): Add call to gfc_simplify_expr.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/100683
* gfortran.dg/pr87993.f90: increased test coverage.
* gfortran.dg/PR100683.f90: New test.

-
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstrasse 201, 80634 München 
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank 
Thürauf

Re: [Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid

2021-06-19 Thread dhumieres.dominique--- via Gcc-patches 

Hi José,

The logic is now much clearer.
OK for the new version. Thanks for the work.

Dominique

[Patch, fortran V3] PR fortran/100683 - Array initialization refuses valid

2021-06-17 Thread José Rui Faustino de Sousa via Gcc-patches 

Hi all!

Update to a proposed patch to:

PR100683 - Array initialization refuses valid

due to more errors being found...

Patch tested only on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.

Add call to simplify expression before parsing *and* check 
*appropriately* if the expression is still an array after simplification.


Add two more situations (already present in the original PR) to 
pr87993.f90 to catch the kind of error I was making.


Thank you very much.

Best regards,
José Rui

Fortran: Fix bogus error

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/100683
* resolve.c (gfc_resolve_expr): Add call to gfc_simplify_expr.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/100683
* gfortran.dg/pr87993.f90: increased test coverage.
* gfortran.dg/PR100683.f90: New test.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
index 45c3ad3..01a2977 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
@@ -7137,7 +7137,12 @@ gfc_resolve_expr (gfc_expr *e)
   /* Also try to expand a constructor.  */
   if (t)
 	{
+	  t = gfc_simplify_expr (e, 1);
+	  if (!t)
+	break;
 	  gfc_expression_rank (e);
+	  if (e->expr_type != EXPR_ARRAY)
+	break;
 	  if (gfc_is_constant_expr (e) || gfc_is_expandable_expr (e))
 	gfc_expand_constructor (e, false);
 	}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/PR100683.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/PR100683.f90
new file mode 100644
index 000..6929bb5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/PR100683.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+! { dg-do run }
+!
+! Test the fix for PR100683
+! 
+
+program main_p
+
+  implicit none
+
+  integer:: i
+  integer, parameter :: n = 11
+  integer, parameter :: u(*) = [(i, i=1,n)]
+
+  type :: foo_t
+integer :: i
+  end type foo_t
+
+  type, extends(foo_t) :: bar_t
+integer :: a(n)
+  end type bar_t
+  
+  type(bar_t), parameter :: a(*) = [(bar_t(i, u), i=1,n)]
+  type(bar_t):: b(n) = [(bar_t(i, u), i=1,n)]
+
+  if(any(a(:)%i/=u))   stop 1
+  do i = 1, n
+if(any(a(i)%a/=u)) stop 2
+  end do
+  if(any(b(:)%i/=u))   stop 3
+  do i = 1, n
+if(any(b(i)%a/=u)) stop 4
+  end do
+  stop
+
+end program main_p
+
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr87993.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr87993.f90
index 96d353d..abc6d0d 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr87993.f90
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr87993.f90
@@ -2,7 +2,15 @@
 ! Code contributed by Gerhard Steinmetz 
 program p
integer, parameter :: a(2) = 1
-   integer, parameter :: b = a%kind
+   character, parameter :: b(2) = "X"
+   integer, parameter :: i = a%kind
+   integer, parameter :: j = a(2)%kind
+   integer, parameter :: k = b%kind
+   integer, parameter :: l = b(2)%kind
if (any(a /= 1)) stop 1
-   if (b /= kind(a)) stop 2
+   if (any(b /= "X")) stop 2
+   if (i /= kind(a)) stop 3
+   if (j /= kind(a)) stop 4
+   if (k /= kind(b)) stop 5
+   if (l /= kind(b)) stop 6
 end