From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id DEC4F3858D28; Tue, 30 Nov 2021 16:45:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DEC4F3858D28
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/103501] New: associative containers left invalid
 after allocator-extended move construction
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 16:45:00 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status
 keywords bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter
 target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-103501-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 16:45:01 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D103501

            Bug ID: 103501
           Summary: associative containers left invalid after
                    allocator-extended move construction
           Product: gcc
           Version: 12.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: wrong-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: libstdc++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

#include <set>
#include <iostream>

template<typename T>
struct Alloc : std::allocator<T>
{
  template<typename U> struct rebind { using other =3D Alloc<U>; };

  Alloc(int i) : id(i) { }

  template<typename U>
    Alloc(const Alloc<U>& a) : id(a.id) { }

  int id;

  using is_always_equal =3D std::false_type;

  bool operator=3D=3D(const Alloc& a) const { return id =3D=3D a.id; }
  bool operator!=3D(const Alloc& a) const { return id !=3D a.id; }
};


struct X
{
  int i;

  X(int i) : i(i) { }
  X(const X& x) noexcept : i(x.i) { }
  X(X&& x) noexcept : i(x.i) { x.i =3D -1; }

  bool operator<(const X& rhs) const { return i < rhs.i; }
};

struct Y
{
  int i;

  Y(int i) : i(i) { }
  Y(const Y& y) noexcept : i(y.i) { }
  Y(Y&& y) noexcept : i(y.i) { y.i =3D -y.i; }

  bool operator<(const Y& rhs) const { return i < rhs.i; }
};


int main()
{
  std::set<X, std::less<>, Alloc<X>> s1{ {1, 2, 3}, Alloc<X>(1)};
  std::set<X, std::less<>, Alloc<X>> s2{ std::move(s1), Alloc<X>(2) };
  for (auto& x : s1)
    std::cout << x.i << '\n';

  std::cout << '\n';

  std::multiset<Y, std::less<>, Alloc<Y>> m1{ {1, 2, 3}, Alloc<Y>(1)};
  std::multiset<Y, std::less<>, Alloc<Y>> m2{ std::move(m1), Alloc<Y>(2) };
  for (auto& y : m1)
    std::cout << y.i << '\n';
}

The sets are left with broken invariants, printing:

-1
-1
-1

-1
-2
-3

(the std::set has non-unique elements, the std::multiset has elements in
non-increasing order).

The problem is that we move each individual element when the allocators are=
 not
equal, and that can leave non-unique elements behind.

I think we need to clear the moved-from sets in this case.

I haven't checked the unordered containers yet to see if they have the same
issue.=