diff mbox series

Fortran: fix ICE in compare_bound_int [PR108527]

Message ID trinity-17ca0330-53b9-466e-b5f4-dcc7526b27bb-1674596893254@3c-app-gmx-bs66
State Accepted
Headers
Series Fortran: fix ICE in compare_bound_int [PR108527] |

Checks

Context Check Description
snail/gcc-patch-check success Github commit url

Commit Message

Harald Anlauf Jan. 24, 2023, 9:48 p.m. UTC 
  Dear all,

when checking expressions for array sections, we need to ensure
that these use only type INTEGER.  However, it does not make sense
to generate an internal error when encountering wrong types,
but rather take the ordinary route of error recovery.

The initial fix was provided by Steve.

While working on the same PR, I found that the comments related
to the logic needed a minor adjustment, and the logic could be
cleaned up to actually match the intended comment.

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

Thanks,
Harald

Comments

Harald Anlauf Jan. 28, 2023, 5:13 p.m. UTC | #1 
Early gentle ping.

Am 24.01.23 um 22:48 schrieb Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches:
> Dear all,
>
> when checking expressions for array sections, we need to ensure
> that these use only type INTEGER.  However, it does not make sense
> to generate an internal error when encountering wrong types,
> but rather take the ordinary route of error recovery.
>
> The initial fix was provided by Steve.
>
> While working on the same PR, I found that the comments related
> to the logic needed a minor adjustment, and the logic could be
> cleaned up to actually match the intended comment.
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline?
>
> Thanks,
> Harald
>
Jerry D Jan. 28, 2023, 7:26 p.m. UTC | #2 
On 1/24/23 1:48 PM, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> when checking expressions for array sections, we need to ensure
> that these use only type INTEGER.  However, it does not make sense
> to generate an internal error when encountering wrong types,
> but rather take the ordinary route of error recovery.
> 
> The initial fix was provided by Steve.
> 
> While working on the same PR, I found that the comments related
> to the logic needed a minor adjustment, and the logic could be
> cleaned up to actually match the intended comment.
> 
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline?
> 
> Thanks,
> Harald
> 

Harald, this looks OK to me. Good for Mainline.
diff mbox series

Patch

From bd9afd0835bfe956400978503041323aea894ef5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 22:36:25 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fortran: fix ICE in compare_bound_int [PR108527]

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

	PR fortran/108527
	* resolve.cc (compare_bound_int): Expression to compare must be of
	type INTEGER.
	(compare_bound_mpz_t): Likewise.
	(check_dimension): Fix comment on checks applied to array section
	and clean up associated logic.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	PR fortran/108527
	* gfortran.dg/pr108527.f90: New test.

Co-authored-by: Steven G. Kargl <kargl@gcc.gnu.org>
---
 gcc/fortran/resolve.cc                 | 29 +++++++++++++-------------
 gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr108527.f90 | 10 +++++++++
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr108527.f90

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
index 94213cd3cd4..0538029da26 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
@@ -4575,12 +4575,11 @@  compare_bound_int (gfc_expr *a, int b)
 {
   int i;

-  if (a == NULL || a->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
+  if (a == NULL
+      || a->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT
+      || a->ts.type != BT_INTEGER)
     return CMP_UNKNOWN;

-  if (a->ts.type != BT_INTEGER)
-    gfc_internal_error ("compare_bound_int(): Bad expression");
-
   i = mpz_cmp_si (a->value.integer, b);

   if (i < 0)
@@ -4598,12 +4597,11 @@  compare_bound_mpz_t (gfc_expr *a, mpz_t b)
 {
   int i;

-  if (a == NULL || a->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
+  if (a == NULL
+      || a->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT
+      || a->ts.type != BT_INTEGER)
     return CMP_UNKNOWN;

-  if (a->ts.type != BT_INTEGER)
-    gfc_internal_error ("compare_bound_int(): Bad expression");
-
   i = mpz_cmp (a->value.integer, b);

   if (i < 0)
@@ -4733,23 +4731,24 @@  check_dimension (int i, gfc_array_ref *ar, gfc_array_spec *as)
 #define AR_END (ar->end[i] ? ar->end[i] : as->upper[i])

 	compare_result comp_start_end = compare_bound (AR_START, AR_END);
+	compare_result comp_stride_zero = compare_bound_int (ar->stride[i], 0);

 	/* Check for zero stride, which is not allowed.  */
-	if (compare_bound_int (ar->stride[i], 0) == CMP_EQ)
+	if (comp_stride_zero == CMP_EQ)
 	  {
 	    gfc_error ("Illegal stride of zero at %L", &ar->c_where[i]);
 	    return false;
 	  }

-	/* if start == len || (stride > 0 && start < len)
-			   || (stride < 0 && start > len),
+	/* if start == end || (stride > 0 && start < end)
+			   || (stride < 0 && start > end),
 	   then the array section contains at least one element.  In this
 	   case, there is an out-of-bounds access if
 	   (start < lower || start > upper).  */
-	if (compare_bound (AR_START, AR_END) == CMP_EQ
-	    || ((compare_bound_int (ar->stride[i], 0) == CMP_GT
-		 || ar->stride[i] == NULL) && comp_start_end == CMP_LT)
-	    || (compare_bound_int (ar->stride[i], 0) == CMP_LT
+	if (comp_start_end == CMP_EQ
+	    || ((comp_stride_zero == CMP_GT || ar->stride[i] == NULL)
+		&& comp_start_end == CMP_LT)
+	    || (comp_stride_zero == CMP_LT
 	        && comp_start_end == CMP_GT))
 	  {
 	    if (compare_bound (AR_START, as->lower[i]) == CMP_LT)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr108527.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr108527.f90
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..c97ba3111cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr108527.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ 
+! { dg-do compile }
+! PR fortran/108527 - ICE in compare_bound_int
+! Contributed by G.Steinmetz
+
+program p
+  integer, parameter :: a((2.)) = [4,8] ! { dg-error "must be of INTEGER type" }
+  integer(a(1:1)) :: b                  ! { dg-error "out of bounds" }
+end
+
+! { dg-prune-output "Parameter array" }
--
2.35.3