[Bug fortran/37829] New: ICE in resolve_symbol

[Bug fortran/37829] New: ICE in resolve_symbol

[jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org]

module modx
  use, intrinsic :: iso_c_binding
  common /spaces/ sp
  integer (c_long) :: sp
  bind (c) :: /spaces/
end module modx

block data
  use modx
  double precision sums
  common /cblock/ sums (4)
  data (sums (i), i = 1,4) / 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 /
end

ICEs in resolve_symbol:
9102  /* Make sure that the derived type has been resolved and that the
9103     derived type is visible in the symbol's namespace, if it is a
9104     module function and is not PRIVATE.  */
9105  if (sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED
9106      && sym->ts.derived->attr.use_assoc
9107      && sym->ns->proc_name->attr.flavor == FL_MODULE)

The first 2 conditions are true, but sym->ns->proc_name is NULL.  sym is
c_funloc, with sym->module "__iso_c_binding".


-- 
           Summary: ICE in resolve_symbol
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.4.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-11-28 21:23 -------
Confirmed.

$> gfortran-svn
gcc version 4.4.0 20081128 (experimental) (GCC)

(gdb) run pr37829.f90                                                           
Starting program:
/home/daniel/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.0/f951
pr37829.f90                                  

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
resolve_symbol (sym=0x9f57f58) at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:9229
9229      if (sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED

(gdb) bt
#0  resolve_symbol (sym=0x9f57f58) at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:9229
#1  0x080c737e in traverse_ns (st=0x9f57f38, func=0x80b9880 <resolve_symbol>)
at /home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/symbol.c:3126
#2  0x080c736a in traverse_ns (st=0x9f585a0, func=0x80b9880 <resolve_symbol>)
at /home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/symbol.c:3123
#3  0x080c736a in traverse_ns (st=0x9f5cdc0, func=0x80b9880 <resolve_symbol>)
at /home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/symbol.c:3123
#4  0x080b59b2 in resolve_types (ns=<value optimized out>) at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:10346
#5  0x080b985c in gfc_resolve (ns=0x9f5c4b0) at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/resolve.c:10427
#6  0x080a6fbf in gfc_parse_file () at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/parse.c:3844
#7  0x080d721d in gfc_be_parse_file (set_yydebug=0) at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c:236
#8  0x08391e7c in toplev_main (argc=2, argv=0xbfcef534) at
/home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/gcc/toplev.c:968
#9  0xb7e20005 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6


-- 

dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
      Known to fail|                            |4.3.2 4.4.0
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2008-11-28 21:23:44
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1099 bytes --]



------- Comment #2 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-12-08 21:06 -------
reduced:

module modx
  use, intrinsic :: iso_c_binding
end module modx

block data
  use modx
end

A simple way to fix it would be this:
Index: resolve.c
===================================================================
--- resolve.c   (révision 142546)
+++ resolve.c   (copie de travail)
@@ -9263,6 +9263,7 @@ resolve_symbol (gfc_symbol *sym)
      module function and is not PRIVATE.  */
   if (sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED
        && sym->ts.derived->attr.use_assoc
+       && sym->ns->proc_name
        && sym->ns->proc_name->attr.flavor == FL_MODULE)
     {
       gfc_symbol *ds;

Paul, I'm adding you as you may know better what to do here.
see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33295#c7


-- 

mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr]

------- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr  2008-12-09 08:41 -------
The patch in comment #2 fixes the ICE without regression on i686-apple-darwin9.
Is not the "obvious rule" applying here?
Thanks


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #4 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-12-09 13:53 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> The patch in comment #2 fixes the ICE without regression on i686-apple-darwin9.
I didn't expect any regression with that patch. 
However, I wonder whether we are not missing something. 

For example, I tried to adapt the testcase in PR 33295 to the c_funloc case. 
The resulting program is rejected with the following error:
Error: Can't convert TYPE(_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr) to TYPE(c_funptr)
at (1)
The question is: Is it valid/Do we want to support this?

module a
  use iso_c_binding, only:c_funptr
end module a

module b
  use iso_c_binding, only:c_funloc!,c_funptr
end module b

module f
  contains
  subroutine g() bind(c)
  end subroutine
end module f

program c
  use b
  use a
  use f
  implicit none
  type (c_funptr) :: d 
  d = c_funloc (g)
end


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-12-09 17:28 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> For example, I tried to adapt the testcase in PR 33295 to the c_funloc case. 
> The resulting program is rejected with the following error:
> Error: Can't convert TYPE(_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr) to TYPE(c_funptr)
> at (1)
> The question is: Is it valid/Do we want to support this?

I don't see why it should be invalid (though I have not spend too much time on
finding a reason). It also compiles just fine with ifort and g95.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr]

------- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr  2008-12-15 12:48 -------
Compiling the test in comment #4 gives:

pr37829_2.f90:21.6:

  d = c_funloc (g)
     1
Error: Can't convert TYPE(_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr) to TYPE(c_funptr)
at (1)

looking the gfortran sources for "c_funptr" I get:

in gcc/fortran/iso-c-binding.def, line 145

DERIVED_TYPE (ISOCBINDING_FUNPTR, "c_funptr", \
              get_int_kind_from_node (ptr_type_node))

and in gcc/fortran/symbol.c, line 3507

      generate_isocbinding_symbol (module_name, ptr_id == ISOCBINDING_NULL_PTR
                                   ? ISOCBINDING_PTR : ISOCBINDING_FUNPTR,
                                   (const char *) (ptr_id ==
ISOCBINDING_NULL_PTR
                                   ? "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_ptr"
                                   : "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr"));

line 3591

  if (iso_c_sym_id == ISOCBINDING_F_PROCPOINTER)
    c_ptr_type = "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr";
  else
    c_ptr_type = "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_ptr";

line 4158

                       (const char *)(s == ISOCBINDING_FUNLOC
                                ? "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr"
                                : "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_ptr"));

I fail to see what is the difference between "c_funptr" and
"_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr".


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr]

------- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr  2009-10-23 15:01 -------
It seems that the patch in comment #2 has been silently applied (I have been
unable to find when) and that the test in comment #0 no longer gives an ICE for
gfortran 4.3.4, 4.4.1, and trunk.

Apparently the failure of the test in comment #4 is due to the fact that
c_funptr is not mangled the way it is defined (through different modules and an
only clause). If I remove module 'a' and the comment in module 'b', the code
compiles.

This pr could probably be closed and a new one open for the problem of comment
#4.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #8 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-10-24 22:42 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> It seems that the patch in comment #2 has been silently applied 
Not exactly silently. It was pr38672

> Apparently the failure of the test in comment #4 is due to the fact that
> c_funptr is not mangled the way it is defined (through different modules and an
> only clause). If I remove module 'a' and the comment in module 'b', the code
> compiles.
The whole iso_c_binding is messy because it doesn't look like normal modules.
It hijacks functions everywhere to take care of iso_c_binding cases and doesn't
benefit from the general code. Here, the derived type of the function c_funloc
is given a mangled name because it is not wanted by the user.
This seems to fix it :

Index: symbol.c
===================================================================
--- symbol.c    (revision 153473)
+++ symbol.c    (working copy)
@@ -4397,8 +4397,8 @@
                      (mod_name, s == ISOCBINDING_FUNLOC
                                 ? ISOCBINDING_FUNPTR : ISOCBINDING_PTR,
                       (const char *)(s == ISOCBINDING_FUNLOC
-                                ? "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_funptr"
-                               : "_gfortran_iso_c_binding_c_ptr"));
+                                ? "c_funptr"
+                               : "c_ptr"));
                     tmp_sym->ts.u.derived =
                       get_iso_c_binding_dt (s == ISOCBINDING_FUNLOC
                                             ? ISOCBINDING_FUNPTR


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE in resolve_symbol

[dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr]

------- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr  2009-10-25 15:34 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> > It seems that the patch in comment #2 has been silently applied 
> Not exactly silently. It was pr38672

Thanks for the pointer. This PR has not been marked as a duplicate of pr38672
and while the later refers to this one, the converse was not true.

> The whole iso_c_binding is messy because it doesn't look like normal modules.

I have also noticed that!-)

> It hijacks functions everywhere to take care of iso_c_binding cases and doesn't
> benefit from the general code. Here, the derived type of the function c_funloc
> is given a mangled name because it is not wanted by the user.
> This seems to fix it :
> ...

I think the patch just papers over the problem. With it, the following (weird,
but legal?) code:

module b
  use iso_c_binding, only:c_funloc!,c_funptr
end module b

program c
  use b
  implicit none
  type c_funptr
     integer :: i
  end type
  type (c_funptr) :: d 
  d = c_funptr(1)
end

now gives errors:

pr37829_2_red_1.f90:8.15:

  type c_funptr
               1
Error: Derived type name 'c_funptr' at (1) already has a basic type of
TYPE(c_funptr)
pr37829_2_red_1.f90:10.5:

  end type
     1
Error: Expecting END PROGRAM statement at (1)
pr37829_2_red_1.f90:12.6:

  d = c_funptr(1)
      1
Error: Components of structure constructor 'c_funptr' at (1) are PRIVATE

This is coherent if the mangling is used to hide symbols not wanted by the
user.
In my opinion the question is how to remove the mangling done in module b, when
the symbol is used in module a. From the little I understand that does seem
obvious for me.

Indeed using c_funloc in one module and defining the return type in another one
is asking for trouble.
Nevertheless if it is legal it should be accepted by gfortran. So either we
change the summary of this pr or close it, opening a new one for this use of
modules. It both cases the pr can be marked with a low priority and as an
enhancement.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] ICE Incorrect name mangling with iso_c_binding

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-12-06 15:40 -------
More descriptive summary. Low priority.


-- 

jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P4
            Summary|ICE in resolve_symbol       |ICE Incorrect name mangling
                   |                            |with iso_c_binding


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] Incorrect name mangling with iso_c_binding

[burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #11 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-09 08:38 -------
*** Bug 44814 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|44814                       |
              nThis|                            |
                 CC|                            |jkrahn at nc dot rr dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] Incorrect name mangling with iso_c_binding

[burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #12 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-09 08:48 -------
For intrinsic modules, we currently have:

  use iso_c_binding, only: c_null_ptr

which use-associates a constant (PARAMETER) of the type "c_ptr" - but "c_ptr"
is not imported directly; to make the type information available, gfortran
currently imports "c_ptr" in a hidden way (_gfortran_...).

But the problem is the same for nonintrinsic modules. Thus, the question is:
How does it work there - it obviously does:

module m
  type t; end type
end module m
module m2
  use m
  ! private; public :: null
  type(t), parameter :: null = t()
end module m2
module m3
  use m
  ! private; public :: sub
contains
  subroutine sub(x); type(t) :: x; end subroutine
end module m3

use m2,  only: null
use m3, only: sub
call sub(null)
contains
  subroutine sub2();  use m; type(t) :: y;  y = null; end subroutine
end


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] Incorrect name mangling with iso_c_binding

[mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #13 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-08-05 17:51 -------
*** Bug 45190 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mathewc at nag dot co dot uk


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] Incorrect name mangling with iso_c_binding

[burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #14 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-08-14 09:31 -------
Cf.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/887251d8cd64eb02

Lightly tested patch. The ts.is_c_interop is only set when via
verify_bind_c_derived_type, which is called by resolve.c - and thus comes too
late.

I am not sure whether this now allows DT which are not BIND(C) and whether one
thus should add an !attr.resolved, but I assume that incompatibilities between
the BIND(C) attribute for the DT and the actual DT will be found at resolution
time. Thus, the patch should be fine.

Index: gcc/fortran/decl.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/decl.c  (Revision 163239)
+++ gcc/fortran/decl.c  (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ verify_c_interop_param (gfc_symbol *sym)
              /* Make personalized messages to give better feedback.  */
              if (sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED)
                gfc_error ("Type '%s' at %L is a parameter to the BIND(C) "
-                          " procedure '%s' but is not C interoperable "
+                          "procedure '%s' but is not C interoperable "
                           "because derived type '%s' is not C interoperable",
                           sym->name, &(sym->declared_at),
                           sym->ns->proc_name->name, 
@@ -3612,7 +3612,8 @@ gfc_try
 verify_c_interop (gfc_typespec *ts)
 {
   if (ts->type == BT_DERIVED && ts->u.derived != NULL)
-    return (ts->u.derived->ts.is_c_interop ? SUCCESS : FAILURE);
+    return (ts->u.derived->ts.is_c_interop || ts->u.derived->attr.is_bind_c)
+          ? SUCCESS : FAILURE;
   else if (ts->is_c_interop != 1)
     return FAILURE;


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829

[Bug fortran/37829] Incorrect name mangling with iso_c_binding

[burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #15 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-08-14 16:24 -------
Ignore comment 14 - that's PR fortran/45211. Sorry.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37829