public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault
@ 2009-12-04 14:30 sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:31 ` [Bug fortran/42274] " sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (36 more replies)
0 siblings, 37 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it @ 2009-12-04 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
The attached code gives an ICE against the fortran-dev branch as of r154975.
[sfilippo@donald bug12]$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gfortran
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/gnudev/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.5.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../fortran-dev/configure --prefix=/usr/local/gnudev
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran : (reconfigured) ../fortran-dev/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/gnudev --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20091203 (experimental) (GCC)
[sfilippo@donald bug12]$ gfortran -c bug12.f03
bug12.f03:229:0: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
--
Summary: ICE: segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
@ 2009-12-04 14:31 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (35 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it @ 2009-12-04 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-12-04 14:30 -------
Created an attachment (id=19223)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19223&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:31 ` [Bug fortran/42274] " sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
@ 2009-12-04 14:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 14:58 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (34 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-04 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 14:48 -------
Fortran people - if you want to use bugzilla for fortran-dev please add a
fortran-dev version people can report bugs against.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|4.5.0 |unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:31 ` [Bug fortran/42274] " sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-04 14:58 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-04 15:02 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (33 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2009-12-04 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-04 14:58 -------
The code compiles with [trunk revision 154654]. It looks like a regression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-04 14:58 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2009-12-04 15:02 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 15:57 ` [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (32 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it @ 2009-12-04 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-12-04 15:02 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> The code compiles with [trunk revision 154654]. It looks like a regression.
>
Yes, I know, this is due to the recent work by Paul Thomas and Janus Weil about
the dynamic dispatching implementation via vtables. I opened a PR to have a
clear track for this problem.
Richard is probably right, it should be clearly marked against the branch,
except that I have neither the knowledge nor the authorization for doing it.
Salvatore
--
sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|unknown |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-04 15:02 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
@ 2009-12-04 15:57 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 17:06 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (31 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-04 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 15:57 -------
> (In reply to comment #3)
> Richard is probably right, it should be clearly marked against the branch,
I have now set "Reported against" to 'fortran-dev', marked it in the Subject
line and in 'known to work/fail'
Backtrace:
mio_pointer_ref (gp=0x28) at
/home/tob/projects/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/module.c:2237
2237 p = get_pointer (*((char **) gp));
(gdb) bt
#0 mio_pointer_ref (gp=0x28) at
/home/tob/projects/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/module.c:2237
#1 0x00000000004f8da9 in mio_symbol_ref (symp=<value optimized out>) at
/home/tob/projects/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/module.c:2498
#2 0x00000000004f90e9 in mio_typebound_proc (proc=0x154b908) at
/home/tob/projects/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/module.c:3352
#3 0x00000000004fa344 in mio_component (c=0x154b880) at
/home/tob/projects/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/module.c:2362
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Known to fail| |fortran-dev
Known to work| |4.5.0
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-12-04 15:57:20
date| |
Summary|ICE: segmentation fault |[fortran-dev Regression]
| |ICE: segmentation fault
Version|unknown |fortran-dev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-04 15:57 ` [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-04 17:06 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 19:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (30 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-04 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 17:06 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> #3 0x00000000004fa344 in mio_component (c=0x154b880) at
> /home/tob/projects/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/module.c:2362
The component here is 'is_null', and the parent symbol is
'vtype$psb_d_base_sparse_mat'. In this context, the component 'is_null' refers
to the PPC of the vtype, not the TBP of the original type.
I think the problem is that c->tb->ppc is not set correctly for the PPCs inside
vtype. If one looks at psb_base_mat_mod.mod, one finds:
(55 'is_null'
(LOGICAL 4 0 0 LOGICAL ()) () (PROCEDURE UNKNOWN-INTENT UNKNOWN-PROC
DECL UNKNOWN 0 0 EXTERNAL FUNCTION PROCEDURE PROC_POINTER) PRIVATE (
NULL (UNKNOWN 0 0 0 UNKNOWN ()) 0) 56 (57) (PUBLIC OVERRIDABLE PASS
SPECIFIC NO_PPC 'a' 0 30))
Note the 'NO_PPC'! Although this clearly *is* a PPC, as indicated by
'PROC_POINTER', the tb.ppc attribute is missing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-04 17:06 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-04 19:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 21:38 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (29 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-04 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 19:43 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> I think the problem is that c->tb->ppc is not set correctly for the PPCs inside
> vtype.
The following patches fixes it:
Index: gcc/fortran/symbol.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/symbol.c (revision 154956)
+++ gcc/fortran/symbol.c (working copy)
@@ -4751,6 +4751,7 @@ add_proc_component (gfc_component *c, gfc_symbol *
if (!c->tb)
c->tb = XCNEW (gfc_typebound_proc);
*c->tb = *st->n.tb;
+ c->tb->ppc = 1;
c->attr.procedure = 1;
c->attr.proc_pointer = 1;
c->attr.flavor = FL_PROCEDURE;
@@ -4790,6 +4791,7 @@ add_proc_comps (gfc_component *c, gfc_symbol *vtyp
else if (c->attr.proc_pointer && c->tb)
{
*c->tb = *st->n.tb;
+ c->tb->ppc = 1;
c->ts.interface = st->n.tb->u.specific->n.sym;
}
}
@@ -4886,7 +4888,7 @@ copy_vtab_proc_comps (gfc_symbol *declared, gfc_sy
c->attr.flavor = FL_PROCEDURE;
c->attr.access = ACCESS_PRIVATE;
c->attr.external = 1;
- c->ts.interface = cmp->tb->u.specific->n.sym;
+ c->ts.interface = cmp->ts.interface;
c->attr.untyped = 1;
c->attr.if_source = IFSRC_IFBODY;
c->initializer = gfc_get_expr ();
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2009-12-04 15:57:20 |2009-12-04 19:43:51
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-04 19:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-04 21:38 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-05 11:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (28 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2009-12-04 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-04 21:37 -------
With the patch in comment #7 the tests in pr41829 and the following ones
segfault at runtime.
!--------------------------------
module m
type :: t1
integer :: i = 42
contains
procedure, pass :: prod => i_m_j
end type t1
type, extends(t1) :: t2
integer :: j = 99
end type t2
contains
integer function i_m_j (arg)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
select type (arg)
type is (t1)
i_m_j = 0
class is (t2)
i_m_j = 1
class default
print *, "should not be here"
end select
end function i_m_j
end module m
use m
class(t1), pointer :: a
type(t1), target :: b
type(t2), target :: c
integer :: itmp
a => b
itmp = a%prod()
print *, itmp
a => c
itmp = a%prod()
print *, itmp
end
!--------------------------------
module m
type :: null_type
end type
type :: t1
integer :: i = 42
procedure(make_real), pointer :: ptr
contains
procedure, pass :: real => make_real
procedure, pass :: make_integer
procedure, pass :: prod => i_m_j
generic, public :: extract => real, make_integer
end type t1
type, extends(t1) :: t2
integer :: j = 99
contains
procedure, pass :: real => make_real2
procedure, pass :: make_integer_2
procedure, pass :: prod => i_m_j_2
generic, public :: extract => real, make_integer_2
end type t2
contains
real function make_real (arg)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
make_real = real (arg%i)
end function make_real
real function make_real2 (arg)
class(t2), intent(in) :: arg
make_real2 = real (arg%j)
end function make_real2
integer function make_integer (arg, arg2)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
integer :: arg2
make_integer = arg%i * arg2
end function make_integer
integer function make_integer_2 (arg, arg2)
class(t2), intent(in) :: arg
integer :: arg2
make_integer_2 = arg%j * arg2
end function make_integer_2
integer function i_m_j (arg)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
i_m_j = arg%i
end function i_m_j
integer function i_m_j_2 (arg)
class(t2), intent(in) :: arg
i_m_j_2 = arg%j
end function i_m_j_2
end module m
use m
class(t1), pointer :: a !=> NULL()
type(t1), target :: b
type(t2), target :: c
a => b
print *, a%i,a%real(), a%prod(), a%extract (2)
a => c
print *, a%i,a%real(), a%prod(), a%extract (3)
end
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-04 21:38 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2009-12-05 11:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-05 13:31 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (27 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-05 11:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 11:20 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> With the patch in comment #7 the tests in pr41829 and the following ones
> segfault at runtime.
Confirmed. This may be an initialization issue of the vtypes. Reduced test
case:
module m
type :: t1
integer :: i = 42
contains
procedure, pass :: prod => i_m_j
end type t1
contains
integer function i_m_j (arg)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
print *,"in i_m_j"
i_m_j = 0
end function i_m_j
end module m
use m
class(t1), pointer :: a
type(t1), target :: b
integer :: itmp
a => b
itmp = a%prod()
print *, itmp
end
--
janus 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=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-05 11:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-05 13:31 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-05 15:14 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (26 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2009-12-05 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-05 13:31 -------
With the patch in comment #7 the tests gfortran.dg/class_9.f03 and
gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_[1-6].f03 also give a segfault at runtime.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-05 13:31 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2009-12-05 15:14 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-05 16:41 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (25 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-05 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 15:14 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> With the patch in comment #7 the tests in pr41829 and the following ones
> segfault at runtime.
Since these run fine with a clean fortran-dev, this is a regression of my
patch, more exactly of the following part:
Index: gcc/fortran/symbol.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/symbol.c (revision 154956)
+++ gcc/fortran/symbol.c (working copy)
@@ -4751,6 +4751,7 @@ add_proc_component (gfc_component *c, gfc_symbol *
if (!c->tb)
c->tb = XCNEW (gfc_typebound_proc);
*c->tb = *st->n.tb;
+ c->tb->ppc = 1;
c->attr.procedure = 1;
c->attr.proc_pointer = 1;
c->attr.flavor = FL_PROCEDURE;
However, I fail to see why. Paul, do you have an idea?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-05 15:14 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-05 16:41 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-06 13:33 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (24 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2009-12-05 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-05 16:41 -------
Removing the line outlined in comment#11, slightly improve the situation:
class_9.f03 and dynamic_dispatch_5.f03, and the test in comment #9 now pass and
I get for pr41829.f90:
[macbook] f90/bug% gfc pr41829.f90
[macbook] f90/bug% a.out
FOO%DOIT base version
Getit value : 1
Segmentation fault
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-05 16:41 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2009-12-06 13:33 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-10 21:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (23 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-06 13:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-06 13:32 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> However, I fail to see why. Paul, do you have an idea?
>
I have loaded fortran-dev and this PR onto my laptop - I'm on the road again
this week.
I'll see if I have anything to offer. In the mean time, there are various
problems associated with vtables that I would like to deal with
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-06 13:33 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-12-10 21:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-02 9:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (22 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-10 21:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-10 21:21 -------
Comparing the dump of the test case in comment #9 with and without the patch in
comment #11 shows that with the patch the following is missing:
@@ -25,10 +25,6 @@ MAIN__ ()
integer(kind=4) itmp;
extern struct vtype$t1 vtab$t1;
- if (vtab$t1.prod == 0B)
- {
- vtab$t1.prod = (integer(kind=4) (*<T41d>) (void)) i_m_j;
- }
a.$vptr = &vtab$t1;
a.$data = &b;
itmp = a.$vptr->prod (&a);
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2009-12-10 21:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-03-02 9:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2010-04-22 20:59 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (21 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2010-03-02 9:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-03-02 09:47 -------
I just opened pr43227 for a similar regression. For the record the backtrace
for the test in comment#1 with fortran-dev revision 157148 is
(gdb) run pr42274.f90
The program being debugged has been started already.
Start it from the beginning? (y or n) y
Starting program: /opt/gcc/gcc4.5d/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin10/4.5.0/f951
pr42274.f90
is_null csclip d_csgetblk d_csgetrow d_b_csclip d_csclip is_null
Program received signal EXC_BAD_ACCESS, Could not access memory.
Reason: KERN_INVALID_ADDRESS at address: 0x0000000000000028
mio_pointer_ref (gp=0x28) at ../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:2251
2251 p = get_pointer (*((char **) gp));
(gdb) bt
#0 mio_pointer_ref (gp=0x28) at ../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:2251
#1 0x0000000100059c79 in mio_symbol_ref (symp=<value temporarily unavailable,
due to optimizations>) at ../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:2512
#2 0x0000000100059fc9 in mio_typebound_proc (proc=0x1418e8040) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:3381
#3 0x000000010005b3ee in mio_component (c=0x1418e7fb0) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:2376
#4 0x000000010005b578 in mio_symbol (sym=0x1418e7690) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:2393
#5 0x000000010005b9ed in write_symbol (n=40, sym=0x1418e7690) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4787
#6 0x000000010005ba9f in write_symbol1 (p=0x14187c560) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4856
#7 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x141870080) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#8 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x14186ff60) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#9 0x000000010005ba53 in write_symbol1 (p=0x14187c8c0) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4851
#10 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418ce660) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#11 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418cc130) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#12 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x141868b70) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#13 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x14187ab80) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#14 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x14187b480) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#15 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418c7e60) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#16 0x000000010005ba53 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418c03c0) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4851
#17 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418c4e00) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#18 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418c28e0) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#19 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x141825cb0) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#20 0x000000010005ba65 in write_symbol1 (p=0x1418a87e0) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:4860
#21 0x000000010005d6dc in gfc_dump_module (name=0x7fff5fbfd3ad "",
dump_flag=<value temporarily unavailable, due to optimizations>) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/module.c:5006
#22 0x0000000100069b5b in gfc_parse_file () at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/parse.c:4226
#23 0x00000001000a2f4c in gfc_be_parse_file (set_yydebug=<value temporarily
unavailable, due to optimizations>) at
../../for_work/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c:239
#24 0x00000001006d61ea in toplev_main (argc=2, argv=0x7fff5fbfd968) at
../../for_work/gcc/toplev.c:1053
#25 0x00000001000017f4 in start ()
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-02 9:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2010-04-22 20:59 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 14:32 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (20 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-22 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-22 20:58 -------
For completeness, here is a reduced/modified version of the original test case
in comment #1:
module mod_A
type :: t1
contains
procedure,nopass :: fun
end type
contains
logical function fun()
end function
end module
module mod_B
use mod_A
type, extends(t1) :: t2
contains
procedure :: sub1
end type
contains
subroutine sub1(a)
class(t2) :: a
end subroutine
end module
module mod_C
contains
subroutine sub2(b)
use mod_B
type(t2) :: b
end subroutine
end module
module mod_D
use mod_A
use mod_C
end module
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-22 20:59 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 14:32 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 14:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (19 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 14:32 -------
Created an attachment (id=20482)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20482&action=view)
patch v2
The attached patch extends the one in comment #7, fixing all regressions
related to non-generic TBPs (hopefully). However, (at least) the following
regressions are left (all including generic TBPs):
* dynamic_dispatch_{1-3,5,7}.f03 in the testsuite
* comment #8 example 2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 14:32 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 14:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 14:57 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (18 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 14:42 -------
Here is a maximally reduced version of comment #8 example 2, which still fails
with the patch in comment #17:
module m
type :: t1
contains
procedure :: make_integer
generic :: extract => make_integer
end type
contains
integer function make_integer (arg)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
make_integer = 3
end function
end module
use m
class(t1), allocatable :: a
allocate(a)
print *, a%extract ()
end
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 14:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 14:57 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 16:27 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (17 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #19 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 14:56 -------
Created an attachment (id=20484)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20484&action=view)
patch v3
Here is an updated patch, which fixes (among others) comment #8 example 2 and
comment #18. The remaining regressions are:
* dynamic_dispatch_{1-3}.f03
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 14:57 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 16:27 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 16:39 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (16 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 16:27 -------
(In reply to comment #19)
Janus,
When I got up this morning, I made a start on documenting the fortran-dev
version of gfc_find_derived_vtab with a view to understand the code flow and to
understand why the original patch was failing.
My suspicion, which is strengthened by the remaining regressions for version 3
of your fix, is that the generic components of the vtab should not be marked as
ppc. I have been tempted to apply it blind but have been trying to analyse
first :-) That does not mean that you should not give it a shot, though!
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 16:27 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 16:39 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2010-04-25 16:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2010-04-25 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #21 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-25 16:38 -------
> Here is an updated patch, which fixes (among others) comment #8 example 2 and
> comment #18. The remaining regressions are:
>
> * dynamic_dispatch_{1-3}.f03
I also have
[macbook] f90/bug% gfc
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_3.f03
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_3.f03: In function
'check_in_module':
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_3.f03:84:0: internal
compiler error: Segmentation fault
[macbook] f90/bug% gfc pr43199.f90
pr43199.f90: In function 'char_less_equal_string':
pr43199.f90:162:0: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Note that this may be due to some interference between the patch in comment #19
and other ones I have in my tree.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (20 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 16:39 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2010-04-25 16:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 17:10 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #22 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 16:43 -------
(In reply to comment #21)
> /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_3.f03:84:0: internal
> compiler error: Segmentation fault
Yes, I can confirm that: typebound_operator_{3,4}.f03 both fail with an ICE.
Thanks for pointing that out. I haven't checked the full testsuite yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (21 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 16:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 17:10 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 17:16 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #23 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 17:09 -------
Created an attachment (id=20485)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20485&action=view)
patch v4
The attached update of the patch removes the ICEs in
typebound_operator_{3,4}.f03.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (22 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 17:10 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 17:16 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 18:24 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #24 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 17:16 -------
(In reply to comment #20)
> My suspicion, which is strengthened by the remaining regressions for version 3
> of your fix, is that the generic components of the vtab should not be marked as
> ppc. I have been tempted to apply it blind but have been trying to analyse
> first :-) That does not mean that you should not give it a shot, though!
Well, in the light of today's progress I am quite optimistic that it should be
possible to have everything working with all the 'ppc' attributes in place.
Note that many cases of generic TBPs are working already. The remaining
failures seem to be related to generic TBPs with overriding.
The following is a reduced version of the runtime failure in
dynamic_dispatch_1.f03:
module m
type :: t1
integer :: i = 42
contains
procedure, pass :: make_integer
generic, public :: extract => make_integer
end type t1
type, extends(t1) :: t2
integer :: j = 99
contains
procedure, pass :: make_integer_2
generic, public :: extract => make_integer_2
end type t2
contains
integer function make_integer (arg, arg2)
class(t1), intent(in) :: arg
integer :: arg2
make_integer = arg%i * arg2
end function make_integer
integer function make_integer_2 (arg, arg2)
class(t2), intent(in) :: arg
integer :: arg2
make_integer_2 = arg%j * arg2
end function make_integer_2
end module m
use m
class(t1), pointer :: a
type(t2), target :: c
a => c
print *,a%extract(3)
if (a%extract (3) .ne. 297) call abort ! FAIL
end
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (23 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 17:16 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 18:24 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 18:28 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
` (11 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #25 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 18:23 -------
I just did a full testsuite run, verifying that "dynamic_dispatch_{1-3}.f03"
are indeed the only failures with the patch in comment #23.
This means that, if we can fix the failure in comment #24, the branch will most
probably be clean, and we can finally merge back to trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (24 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 18:24 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 18:28 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-04-25 18:59 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com @ 2010-04-25 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #26 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com 2010-04-25 18:28 -------
Subject: Re: [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation
fault
Dear Janus,
I thought that I would lend a helping hand, so I applied your latest
patch to my fortran-dev. Since I had left some of my array reference
development in place, it failed to apply on
***************
*** 2486,2492 ****
not to the class declared type. */
vtab = gfc_find_derived_vtab (e->ts.u.derived, true);
gcc_assert (vtab);
- gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs (&parmse->pre, vtab);
tmp = gfc_build_addr_expr (NULL_TREE, gfc_get_symbol_decl (vtab));
gfc_add_modify (&parmse->pre, ctree,
fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (ctree), tmp));
--- 2486,2492 ----
not to the class declared type. */
vtab = gfc_find_derived_vtab (e->ts.u.derived, true);
gcc_assert (vtab);
+ gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs (&parmse->pre, e->ts.u.derived, vtab);
tmp = gfc_build_addr_expr (NULL_TREE, gfc_get_symbol_decl (vtab));
gfc_add_modify (&parmse->pre, ctree,
fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (ctree), tmp));
Since this was a compilable source, even with the failure, I decided
to build it anyway. Lo and behold, the regressions have gone :-)
It's just now regtesting.
Please find the whole diff attached.
I hope that this helps.
Cheers
Paul
------- Comment #27 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com 2010-04-25 18:28 -------
Created an attachment (id=20486)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20486&action=view)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (25 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 18:28 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
@ 2010-04-25 18:59 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-04-25 19:17 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (9 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com @ 2010-04-25 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1758 bytes --]
------- Comment #28 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com 2010-04-25 18:59 -------
Subject: Re: [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation
fault
Janus,
Forget all of our last exchanges - I screwed up somehow with the
patch. This has nothing to do with your problem
Sorry
Paul
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Paul Richard Thomas
<paul.richard.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Janus,
>
> I thought that I would lend a helping hand, so I applied your latest
> patch to my fortran-dev. Since I had left some of my array reference
> development in place, it failed to apply on
>
> ***************
> *** 2486,2492 ****
> not to the class declared type. */
> vtab = gfc_find_derived_vtab (e->ts.u.derived, true);
> gcc_assert (vtab);
> - gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs (&parmse->pre, vtab);
> tmp = gfc_build_addr_expr (NULL_TREE, gfc_get_symbol_decl (vtab));
> gfc_add_modify (&parmse->pre, ctree,
> fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (ctree), tmp));
> --- 2486,2492 ----
> not to the class declared type. */
> vtab = gfc_find_derived_vtab (e->ts.u.derived, true);
> gcc_assert (vtab);
> + gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs (&parmse->pre, e->ts.u.derived, vtab);
> tmp = gfc_build_addr_expr (NULL_TREE, gfc_get_symbol_decl (vtab));
> gfc_add_modify (&parmse->pre, ctree,
> fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (ctree), tmp));
>
> Since this was a compilable source, even with the failure, I decided
> to build it anyway. Lo and behold, the regressions have gone :-)
>
> It's just now regtesting.
>
> Please find the whole diff attached.
>
> I hope that this helps.
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (26 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 18:59 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
@ 2010-04-25 19:17 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-04-25 19:50 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it @ 2010-04-25 19:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #29 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2010-04-25 19:16 -------
(In reply to comment #27)
> Created an attachment (id=20486)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20486&action=view) [edit]
>
Tried this patch: compilation goes past the previous point, so we made
progress.
My library build stops later with
psb_ssymbmm.f90: In function 'psb_ssymbmm':
psb_ssymbmm.f90:88:0: error: statement makes a memory store, but has no VDEFS
c_7.a.$data = 0B;
psb_ssymbmm.f90:88:0: internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make[2]: *** [psb_ssymbmm.o] Error 1
Does it ring a bell ? If this is not an obvious duplicate of some other issue,
I'll open a PR (tomorrow....)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (27 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 19:17 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
@ 2010-04-25 19:50 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 20:17 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #30 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 19:50 -------
(In reply to comment #29)
> (In reply to comment #27)
> > Created an attachment (id=20486)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20486&action=view) [edit]
> >
> Tried this patch: compilation goes past the previous point, so we made
> progress.
> My library build stops later with
Salvatore: As you heard, Paul's patch is screwed up. Maybe you could rather try
the patch in comment #23, which is clean (except for a small regression) and
fixes your original problem. Does this give the same error on your code?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (28 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 19:50 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 20:17 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 20:20 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (6 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #31 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 20:17 -------
Ok, back to fixing the remaining regression, namely comment #24. Compiling this
with and without the patch in comment #23 shows the following difference:
--- c24.dump.unpatched 2010-04-25 22:03:44.418204091 +0200
+++ c24.dump.patched 2010-04-25 21:55:50.500619202 +0200
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ MAIN__ ()
if (vtab$t2.make_integer == 0B)
{
vtab$t2.make_integer = (integer(kind=4) (*<T434>) (void)) make_integer;
- vtab$vtype$t2$extract.make_integer = make_integer_2;
+ vtab$vtype$t2$extract.make_integer = (integer(kind=4) (*<T43f>) (struct
.class.t2 & restrict, integer(kind=4) & restrict)) make_integer;
vtab$t2.extract = &vtab$vtype$t2$extract;
vtab$t2.make_integer_2 = (integer(kind=4) (*<T434>) (void))
make_integer_2;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (29 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 20:17 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 20:20 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-04-25 21:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it @ 2010-04-25 20:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #32 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2010-04-25 20:20 -------
(In reply to comment #30)
>
> Salvatore: As you heard, Paul's patch is screwed up. Maybe you could rather try
> the patch in comment #23, which is clean (except for a small regression) and
> fixes your original problem. Does this give the same error on your code?
>
Actually I tried both, and both give the same error. The obvious question is
whether this is related to the patch or not.
I really look forward to the merge into trunk, and I would prefer reporting the
new bug against trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (30 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 20:20 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
@ 2010-04-25 21:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 22:26 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 21:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #33 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 21:44 -------
Created an attachment (id=20488)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20488&action=view)
patch v5
The attached version of the patch clears the failures of
dynamic_dispatch_{1-3}.f03. It is free of regressions in class_*, dynamic_* and
typebound_*. Will do a full testsuite run now.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #20482|0 |1
is obsolete| |
Attachment #20484|0 |1
is obsolete| |
Attachment #20485|0 |1
is obsolete| |
Attachment #20486|0 |1
is obsolete| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (31 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 21:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-25 22:26 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-26 8:23 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
` (3 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-25 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #34 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 22:26 -------
(In reply to comment #33)
> Will do a full testsuite run now.
The testsuite completed cleanly, without any failures. Paul, if you agree that
this patch is ok, I can commit it tomorrow.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (32 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-25 22:26 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-26 8:23 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2010-04-26 9:08 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr @ 2010-04-26 8:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #35 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-26 08:23 -------
> The testsuite completed cleanly, without any failures. Paul, if you agree that
> this patch is ok, I can commit it tomorrow.
Confirmed without any problem on my own test.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (33 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-26 8:23 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
@ 2010-04-26 9:08 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-26 10:57 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-29 19:12 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-26 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #36 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-26 09:08 -------
Subject: Bug 42274
Author: janus
Date: Mon Apr 26 09:07:26 2010
New Revision: 158721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158721
Log:
2010-04-26 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42274
* symbol.c (add_proc_component,add_proc_comps): Correctly set the 'ppc'
attribute for all PPC members of the vtypes.
(copy_vtab_proc_comps): Copy the correct interface.
* trans.h (gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs): Modified prototype.
* trans-expr.c (gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs): Pass the derived type as
a dummy argument and make sure all PPC members of the vtab are
initialized correctly.
(gfc_conv_derived_to_class,gfc_trans_class_assign): Additional argument
in call to gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs.
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_allocate): Ditto.
2010-04-26 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42274
* gfortran.dg/class_15.f03: New.
Added:
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_15.f03
Modified:
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog.fortran-dev
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/symbol.c
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/fortran/trans.h
branches/fortran-dev/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.fortran-dev
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (34 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-26 9:08 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-26 10:57 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-29 19:12 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-26 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #37 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-26 10:57 -------
I think that we can mark this as closed.
Thanks, first to Salvatore for the report and second to Janus for the fix.
Salvatore, to repeat Janus's request, could you please check that there are no
further regressions, relative to trunk? I am aiming to synchronise the two
trees later on this week.
Thanks again for all the efforts
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] ICE: segmentation fault
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
` (35 preceding siblings ...)
2010-04-26 10:57 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-29 19:12 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
36 siblings, 0 replies; 38+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-29 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #38 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 19:11 -------
Subject: Bug 42274
Author: pault
Date: Thu Apr 29 19:10:48 2010
New Revision: 158910
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158910
Log:
2010-04-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/43896
* symbol.c (add_proc_component,copy_vtab_proc_comps): Remove
initializers for PPC members of the vtabs.
2010-04-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42274
* symbol.c (add_proc_component,add_proc_comps): Correctly set the 'ppc'
attribute for all PPC members of the vtypes.
(copy_vtab_proc_comps): Copy the correct interface.
* trans.h (gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs): Modified prototype.
* trans-expr.c (gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs): Pass the derived type as
a dummy argument and make sure all PPC members of the vtab are
initialized correctly.
(gfc_conv_derived_to_class,gfc_trans_class_assign): Additional argument
in call to gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs.
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_allocate): Ditto.
2010-04-29 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/43326
* resolve.c (resolve_typebound_function): Renamed
resolve_class_compcall.Do all the detection of class references
here.
(resolve_typebound_subroutine): resolve_class_typebound_call
renamed. Otherwise same as resolve_typebound_function.
(gfc_resolve_expr): Call resolve_typebound_function.
(resolve_code): Call resolve_typebound_subroutine.
2010-04-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/43492
* resolve.c (resolve_typebound_generic_call): For CLASS methods
pass back the specific symtree name, rather than the target
name.
2010-04-29 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42353
* resolve.c (resolve_structure_cons): Make the initializer of
the vtab component 'extends' the same type as the component.
2010-04-29 Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42680
* interface.c (check_interface1): Pass symbol name rather than NULL to
gfc_compare_interfaces.(gfc_compare_interfaces): Add assert to
trap MULL. (gfc_compare_derived_types): Revert previous change
incorporated incorrectly during merge from trunk, r155778.
* resolve.c (check_generic_tbp_ambiguity): Pass symbol name rather
than NULL to gfc_compare_interfaces.
* symbol.c (add_generic_specifics): Likewise.
2010-02-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42353
* interface.c (gfc_compare_derived_types): Add condition for vtype.
* symbol.c (gfc_find_derived_vtab): Sey access to private.
(gfc_find_derived_vtab): Likewise.
* module.c (ab_attribute): Add enumerator AB_VTAB.
(mio_symbol_attribute): Use new attribute, AB_VTAB.
(check_for_ambiguous): Likewise.
2010-04-29 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/41829
* trans-expr.c (select_class_proc): Remove function.
(conv_function_val): Delete reference to previous.
(gfc_conv_derived_to_class): Add second argument to the call to
gfc_find_derived_vtab.
(gfc_conv_structure): Exclude proc_pointer components when
accessing $data field of class objects.
(gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs): New function.
(gfc_trans_class_assign): Add second argument to the call to
gfc_find_derived_vtab.
* symbol.c (gfc_build_class_symbol): Add delayed_vtab arg and
implement holding off searching for the vptr derived type.
(add_proc_component): New function.
(add_proc_comps): New function.
(add_procs_to_declared_vtab1): New function.
(copy_vtab_proc_comps): New function.
(add_procs_to_declared_vtab): New function.
(void add_generic_specifics): New function.
(add_generics_to_declared_vtab): New function.
(gfc_find_derived_vtab): Add second argument to the call to
gfc_find_derived_vtab. Add the calls to
add_procs_to_declared_vtab and add_generics_to_declared_vtab.
* decl.c (build_sym, build_struct): Use new arg in calls to
gfc_build_class_symbol.
* gfortran.h : Add vtype bitfield to symbol_attr. Remove the
definition of struct gfc_class_esym_list. Modify prototypes
of gfc_build_class_symbol and gfc_find_derived_vtab.
* trans-stmt.c (gfc_trans_allocate): Add second argument to the
call to gfc_find_derived_vtab.
* module.c : Add the vtype attribute.
* trans.h : Add prototype for gfc_trans_assign_vtab_procs.
* resolve.c (resolve_typebound_generic_call): Add second arg
to pass along the generic name for class methods.
(resolve_typebound_call): The same.
(resolve_compcall): Use the second arg to carry the generic
name from the above. Remove the reference to class_esym.
(check_members, check_class_members, resolve_class_esym,
hash_value_expr): Remove functions.
(resolve_class_compcall, resolve_class_typebound_call): Modify
to use vtable rather than member by member calls.
(gfc_resolve_expr): Modify second arg in call to
resolve_compcall.
(resolve_select_type): Add second arg in call to
gfc_find_derived_vtab.
(resolve_code): Add second arg in call resolve_typebound_call.
(resolve_fl_derived): Exclude vtypes from check for late
procedure definitions. Likewise for checking of explicit
interface and checking of pass arg.
* iresolve.c (gfc_resolve_extends_type_of): Add second arg in
calls to gfc_find_derived_vtab.
* match.c (select_type_set_tmp): Use new arg in call to
gfc_build_class_symbol.
* trans-decl.c (gfc_get_symbol_decl): Complete vtable if
necessary.
* parse.c (endType): Finish incomplete classes.
2010-04-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42274
* gfortran.dg/class_16.f03: New test.
2010-04-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42274
* gfortran.dg/class_15.f03: New.
2010-04-29 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/43326
* gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_9.f03: New test.
2010-04-29 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/43492
* gfortran.dg/generic_22.f03 : New test.
2010-04-29 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42353
* gfortran.dg/class_14.f03: New test.
2010-04-29 Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/42680
* gfortran.dg/interface_32.f90: New test.
2009-04-29 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/41829
* gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_5.f03 : Change to "run".
* gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_7.f03 : New test.
* gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_8.f03 : New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_14.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_15.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_16.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_8.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_9.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/generic_22.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/interface_32.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/decl.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h
trunk/gcc/fortran/interface.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/iresolve.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/match.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/module.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/parse.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/symbol.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.h
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_5.f03
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dynamic_dispatch_7.f03
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42274
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 38+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-04-29 19:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-12-04 14:30 [Bug fortran/42274] New: ICE: segmentation fault sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:31 ` [Bug fortran/42274] " sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 14:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 14:58 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-04 15:02 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2009-12-04 15:57 ` [Bug fortran/42274] [fortran-dev Regression] " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 17:06 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 19:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-04 21:38 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-05 11:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-05 13:31 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-05 15:14 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-05 16:41 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2009-12-06 13:33 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-10 21:21 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-03-02 9:47 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2010-04-22 20:59 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 14:32 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 14:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 14:57 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 16:27 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 16:39 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2010-04-25 16:43 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 17:10 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 17:16 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 18:24 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 18:28 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-04-25 18:59 ` paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-04-25 19:17 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-04-25 19:50 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 20:17 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 20:20 ` sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
2010-04-25 21:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-25 22:26 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-26 8:23 ` dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
2010-04-26 9:08 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-26 10:57 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-29 19:12 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
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).