From: Mikael Morin <morin-mikael@orange.fr>
To: Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com>,
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: gscfq@t-online.de, Kwok Cheung Yeung <kcy@codesourcery.com>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] openmp, fortran: Check that event handles passed to detach clauses are not arrays [PR104131]
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 16:37:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6f75ce81-648d-a2e5-b9f4-b9aaa4a19775@orange.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14be1163-51e6-19bd-0032-c18a53ffe254@codesourcery.com>
So, if I try to sum up what has been gathered in this thread:
- pr104131.f90 is invalid, as x is not scalar.
Checks are better done in resolve_omp_clauses after a call
to gfc_resolve_expr.
Checking expr->sym->attr.dimension seems to cover more cases than
expr->rank > 0.
- pr104131-2.f90 is valid and should be accepted.
- Some other cases should be rejected, including x[1] (coindexed
variable), x(1) (array element), x%comp (structure component).
Is that correct? Anything else?
Regarding the expr->rank vs expr->sym->attr.dimension controversy, my
take is that it should stick to the error message. Use expr->rank is
the error is about scalar vs array, use expr->sym->attr.dimension if
it’s about subobject-ness of an array variable.
Coming back to the PR, the ICE backtraces for pr104131.f90 and
pr104131-2.f90 are different and should probably be treated separatedly.
I don’t know how difficult the bullet 2 above would be, but bullet 1 and
3 seem quite doable.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-01 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-28 14:01 Kwok Cheung Yeung
2022-02-28 14:07 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-02-28 14:27 ` Kwok Cheung Yeung
2022-02-28 15:54 ` Mikael Morin
2022-02-28 16:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-02-28 17:33 ` Mikael Morin
2022-02-28 17:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-02-28 18:38 ` Kwok Cheung Yeung
2022-02-28 20:37 ` Mikael Morin
2022-02-28 20:45 ` Mikael Morin
2022-02-28 21:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-02-28 22:36 ` Mikael Morin
2022-03-01 7:58 ` Tobias Burnus
2022-03-01 8:16 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-03-01 9:17 ` Tobias Burnus
2022-03-01 15:37 ` Mikael Morin [this message]
2022-03-02 17:22 ` [PATCH][v2] openmp, fortran: Check that the type of an event handle in a detach clause is suitable [PR104131] Kwok Cheung Yeung
2022-03-02 17:31 ` Jakub Jelinek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6f75ce81-648d-a2e5-b9f4-b9aaa4a19775@orange.fr \
--to=morin-mikael@orange.fr \
--cc=fortran@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gscfq@t-online.de \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=kcy@codesourcery.com \
--cc=tobias@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).