[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-04 10:50:22 UTC --- Fixed with r178509. Closing. Thanks for the report, Andrew!
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #16 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-04 10:49:18 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Sun Sep 4 10:49:13 2011 New Revision: 178509 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178509 Log: 2011-09-04 Janus Weil PR fortran/50227 * trans-types.c (gfc_sym_type): Check for proc_name. 2011-09-04 Janus Weil PR fortran/50227 * gfortran.dg/class_45a.f03: New. * gfortran.dg/class_45b.f03: New. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_45a.f03 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_45b.f03 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-types.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |janus at gcc dot gnu.org |gnu.org | --- Comment #15 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-04 10:46:15 UTC --- I should probably take this one. There was a patch posted at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-09/msg1.html which I am about to commit.
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-31 11:28:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > > gfortran-4.7 -c module.f90 > > gfortran-4.7 program.f90 > > What about > gfortran-4.7 program.f90 module.o? > AFAIK there is not "object" in the *.mod files. Of course. If I fail to include all object files in the linking process, I should not be too surprised about linker errors. Sorry about the noise, yesterday just wasn't my day :(
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-30 17:24:31 UTC --- > gfortran-4.7 -c module.f90 > gfortran-4.7 program.f90 What about gfortran-4.7 program.f90 module.o? AFAIK there is not "object" in the *.mod files.
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-30 17:09:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > And indeed it seems to fix the segfault. ... and regtests cleanly. Unfortunately, there is one more complication: When compiling the two files from comment #1 one after the other, one gets a linker error: > gfortran-4.7 -c module.f90 > gfortran-4.7 program.f90 /tmp/ccU0pMIF.o: In function `MAIN__': program.f90:(.text+0x16): undefined reference to `__g_nodes_MOD___vtab_g_nodes_T0' program.f90:(.text+0x87): undefined reference to `__g_nodes_MOD___vtab_g_nodes_T1' Note: This seems to happen with trunk and 4.6, while it works with 4.5. I was hoping we had gotten rid of those for good (cf. e.g. PR44065 and PR45674).
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 19:28:42 UTC ---
Well, the obvious patch (based on Tobias' debugging) would be:
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-types.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/trans-types.c (revision 178253)
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-types.c (working copy)
@@ -2109,7 +2109,8 @@ gfc_sym_type (gfc_symbol * sym)
{
/* We must use pointer types for potentially absent variables. The
optimizers assume a reference type argument is never NULL. */
- if (sym->attr.optional || sym->ns->proc_name->attr.entry_master)
+ if (sym->attr.optional
+ || (sym->ns->proc_name && sym->ns->proc_name->attr.entry_master))
type = build_pointer_type (type);
else
{
And indeed it seems to fix the segfault. However, I still don't really see the
connection to r171654.
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 18:29:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > > > (r171654?). > > > > Rather not. This one only concerns type-bound procedures (of which Andrew's > > test case has none): > > Sorry to be such a nuisance, but it is: r171653 works, r171654 crashes. Well, ok. If you say so :) Empirics beats intuition, I guess. Also, you're not a nuisance at all. That's valuable information! Thanks for checking ...
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29 18:17:50 UTC --- > > (r171654?). > > Rather not. This one only concerns type-bound procedures (of which Andrew's > test case has none): Sorry to be such a nuisance, but it is: r171653 works, r171654 crashes.
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29 17:39:01 UTC --- > Oops. Did I do this? Sorry, it was not intentional ... Apparently this happens while changing the summary(?).
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 17:36:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Why setting this pr as unconfirmed? Oops. Did I do this? Sorry, it was not intentional ...
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-29 17:34:02 UTC --- Why setting this pr as unconfirmed?
[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED Summary|[4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE |[4.7 Regression] [OOP] |on valid with allocatable |ICE-on-valid with |class component |allocatable class variable Ever Confirmed|1 |0
