[PATCH] PR fortran/98307 - Dependency check fails when using "allocatable"

[PATCH] PR fortran/98307 - Dependency check fails when using "allocatable"

[Harald Anlauf]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 792 bytes --]

Dear all,

since the introduction of check_forall_dependencies() we mishandled the
dependencies of ALLOCATABLE components of derived types, while POINTER
was dealt with.  Fix that.

Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.

OK for master?  Since we generate wrong code under the given circumstances,
what do people think about backports?

Thanks,
Harald


PR fortran/98307 - Dependency check fails when using "allocatable"

The dependency check for FORALL constructs already handled pointer
components to derived types, but missed allocatables.  Fix that.

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

	PR fortran/98307
	* trans-stmt.c (check_forall_dependencies): Extend dependency
	check to allocatable components of derived types.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	PR fortran/98307
	* gfortran.dg/forall_19.f90: New test.


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: pr98307.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1860 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
index adc6b8fefb5..112a4e8ead9 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
@@ -3949,9 +3949,10 @@ check_forall_dependencies (gfc_code *c, stmtblock_t *pre, stmtblock_t *post)
      point to the copy instead.  Note that the shallow copy of
      the variable will not suffice for derived types with
      pointer components.  We therefore leave these to their
-     own devices.  */
+     own devices.  Likewise for allocatable components.  */
   if (lsym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED
-	&& lsym->ts.u.derived->attr.pointer_comp)
+      && (lsym->ts.u.derived->attr.pointer_comp
+	  || lsym->ts.u.derived->attr.alloc_comp))
     return need_temp;

   new_symtree = NULL;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/forall_19.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/forall_19.f90
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..ef05c97ab24
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/forall_19.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+! { dg-do run }
+! PR fortran/98307 - Dependency check fails when using "allocatable"
+
+program forall_deps
+  implicit none
+  type t
+    logical :: valid = .true.
+    integer :: s     = 0
+    integer, allocatable :: p(:)
+  end type
+  type(t) :: v(2)
+  integer :: i
+
+  allocate (v(1)%p(8))
+  allocate (v(2)%p(8))
+  v(1)%s    = 8
+  v(2)%s    = 6
+
+  v(1)%p(:) = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]
+  v(2)%p(:) = [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20]
+  forall (i=1:2)
+     v(i)%p(1:v(i)%s) = v(3-i)%p(1:v(i)%s)
+  end forall
+  if (any(v(2)%p(:) /= [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 19, 20])) stop 1
+
+  v(1)%p(:) = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]
+  v(2)%p(:) = [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20]
+  forall (i=1:2, v(i)%valid)
+     v(i)%p(1:v(i)%s) = v(3-i)%p(1:v(i)%s)
+  end forall
+  if (any(v(2)%p(:) /= [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 19, 20])) stop 2
+end

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/98307 - Dependency check fails when using "allocatable"

[Thomas Koenig]

Hi Harald,

> OK for master?  Since we generate wrong code under the given circumstances,
> what do people think about backports?

OK for master.  The patch is also simple enough that the risk
of regressions is almost nil, so backports are also OK.

Best regards

	Thomas