* [Bug fortran/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-23 23:21 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-23 23:31 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-23 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target| |x86_64-*-freebsd
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-23 23:21 ` [Bug fortran/102910] " kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-23 23:31 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-24 5:28 ` [Bug testsuite/102910] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-23 23:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This fixes the issue. The assumption that alloca.h is available on
all systems is likely not a good idea. The function alloca() lives
in stdlib.h on at least FreeBSD.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/c-interop/cf-descriptor-5-c.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/c
-interop/cf-descriptor-5-c.c
index 12464b55512..2a525c522b8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/c-interop/cf-descriptor-5-c.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/c-interop/cf-descriptor-5-c.c
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
+#ifndef alloca
#include <alloca.h>
+#endif
#include <ISO_Fortran_binding.h>
#include "dump-descriptors.h"
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-23 23:21 ` [Bug fortran/102910] " kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-23 23:31 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-24 5:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-24 18:34 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
` (12 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-24 5:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|fortran |testsuite
Last reconfirmed| |2021-10-24
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Version|unknown |12.0
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think the following is better:
#ifndef alloca
#define alloca __builtin_alloca
#endif
Instead of the include of alloca.h.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-24 5:28 ` [Bug testsuite/102910] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-24 18:34 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2021-10-24 18:39 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu @ 2021-10-24 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 05:28:08AM +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> I think the following is better:
>
> #ifndef alloca
> #define alloca __builtin_alloca
> #endif
>
> Instead of the include of alloca.h.
>
I have no preference with regards to the fix. I do
however prefer that when trivially obvious choices
are available that one is selected and committed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-24 18:34 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
@ 2021-10-24 18:39 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-24 19:31 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-24 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dje.gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
David, please, unfix your fix for this testcase. It is causes 5 FAILs in the
testsuite.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-24 18:39 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-24 19:31 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-24 20:59 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dje at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-24 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Previously the test case was unresolved because it referenced alloca without a
declaration.
char *adata = (char *) alloca (n);
If you want to call __builtin_alloca() because this is a testcase for GCC,
which provides __builtin_alloca(), fine. You should call it directly and not
alloca().
If you want to call alloca(), then you need logic for the different systems
that declare alloca() in different header files.
#ifdef alloca
is wrong because it makes the testcase system dependent and tests different
behavior.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-24 19:31 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-24 20:59 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-24 21:35 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-24 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #5)
> Previously the test case was unresolved because it referenced alloca without
> a declaration.
>
> char *adata = (char *) alloca (n);
>
> If you want to call __builtin_alloca() because this is a testcase for GCC,
> which provides __builtin_alloca(), fine. You should call it directly and
> not alloca().
>
> If you want to call alloca(), then you need logic for the different systems
> that declare alloca() in different header files.
>
> #ifdef alloca
>
> is wrong because it makes the testcase system dependent and tests different
> behavior.
It seems you broke it with
% git blame gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/c-interop/cf-descriptor-5-c.c
cb17b5054118 (Sandra Loosemore 2021-06-30 20:03:27 -0700 1) #include
<stdlib.h
>
cb17b5054118 (Sandra Loosemore 2021-06-30 20:03:27 -0700 2) #include
<stdio.h>
000000000000 (Not Committed Yet 2021-10-24 13:54:29 -0700 3) #ifndef alloca
f1408388f2e2 (David Edelsohn 2021-09-30 16:43:58 -0400 4) #include
<alloca.h
>
000000000000 (Not Committed Yet 2021-10-24 13:54:29 -0700 5) #endif
Shouldn't the person who broke the testcase fix it? Or, is it okay
for anyone to commit an unreviewed knowingly broken "fix" to paper over
a failure on whatever target they are working on?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-24 20:59 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-24 21:35 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-25 10:08 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: dje at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-24 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #7 from David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Sandra checked in a large number of testcases for interoperability that were
broken from the outset on all platforms -- I saw them failing on multiple Linux
architectures, not just AIX. The testcases should have been XFAILed when
initially checked in. If the testcases had been XFAILed, it would have been
apparent that the cf-descriptor-5-c.c testcase was not written portably for
different OSes.
My patch apparently swapped which targets produced UNRESOLVED and which
produced FAIL (now PASS).
Known failing portability testcases should not have been checked in to the GCC
repository.
alloca() is a mess. If you have better visibility into the portability of
alloca() across platforms, you're welcome to fix it. I suggest that having
different targets use different definitions of alloca muddles the test. If the
intention is for the system header to substitute __builtin_alloca() for
alloca(), then it suggest would be better use that from the beginning. The
testcase seems to intend to test C-Fortran interoperability, not alloca().
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-24 21:35 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-25 10:08 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-25 17:05 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-25 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I wonder whether something likewise (using __builtin_alloca) should also be
done in libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/loop-gwv-2.c, which
currently uses
"#include <alloca.h>" + "alloca".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-25 10:08 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-25 17:05 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-25 17:53 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
` (5 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sandra at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-25 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #9 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I will rewrite this testcase not to use alloca.
This particular case was originally XFAIL'ed at runtime because the
functionality it was supposed to test (assumed-length character
interoperability) was broken before Tobias fixed the GFC/CFI descriptor
conversion. I was not aware that it was also failing to compile on some
targets; I don't have any way to test FreeBSD or AIX targets, in particular.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-25 17:05 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-25 17:53 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2021-10-25 18:33 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu @ 2021-10-25 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 05:05:26PM +0000, sandra at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
>
> --- Comment #9 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> I will rewrite this testcase not to use alloca.
Thanks. I wasn't sure if you were purposely using
alloca() to put something on the stack to check for
correct CFI behavior or not. I proposed the simplest
solution I could think that fixes the FreeBSD failure.
I just checked and OpenBSD and NetBSD also have
prototypes in stdlib.h for alloca().
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-25 17:53 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
@ 2021-10-25 18:33 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-25 18:48 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sandra at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-25 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #11 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-October/056807.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-25 18:33 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-25 18:48 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:25 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-25 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus <burnus@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:72dc270be793f159a3a038bef41542d85550b331
commit r12-4691-g72dc270be793f159a3a038bef41542d85550b331
Author: Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com>
Date: Mon Oct 25 20:40:13 2021 +0200
libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/loop-gwv-2.c: Use __builtin_alloca
Some systems do not have <alloca.h> but provide alloca differently, e.g.
via stdlib.h. Do it like other testcases do and use __builtin_alloca.
libgomp/ChangeLog:
PR testsuite/102910
* testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/loop-gwv-2.c: Use
__builtin_alloca
instead of #include <alloca.h> + alloca.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-25 18:48 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 14:25 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:26 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 16:40 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore <sandra@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9190a1c6d001099d1409298ae3b684499bd1fdd
commit r12-4714-gf9190a1c6d001099d1409298ae3b684499bd1fdd
Author: Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>
Date: Mon Oct 25 11:08:28 2021 -0700
Fix broken use of alloca in C interoperability testcase
2021-10-25 Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>
gcc/testsuite/
PR testsuite/102910
* gfortran.dg/c-interop/cf-descriptor-5-c.c: Use a static buffer
instead of alloca.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-26 14:25 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 14:26 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 16:40 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: sandra at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #14 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Should be fixed now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102910] cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build
2021-10-23 23:20 [Bug fortran/102910] New: cf-descriptor-5-c.c fails to build kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-26 14:26 ` sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 16:40 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
15 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102910
--- Comment #15 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to sandra from comment #14)
> Should be fixed now.
Thanks you for fixing this, and the CFI issues you've been working through.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread