[Bug fortran/95375] New: ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[Bug fortran/95375] New: ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[gscfq@t-online.de]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

            Bug ID: 95375
           Summary: ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison
                    operand types
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: gscfq@t-online.de
  Target Milestone: ---

An inconsistent interface hits versions down to at least r5 :
(detected without bind(c))


$ cat z1.f90
function f() result(n) bind(c)
   class(*), allocatable :: n
end
program p
   interface
      function f() result(n) bind(c)
         integer :: n
      end
   end interface
   if ( f() /= 0 ) stop
end


$ gfortran-11-20200524 -c z1.f90
during GIMPLE pass: ssa
z1.f90:11:0:

   11 | end
      |
internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
0xbc0f6f crash_signal
        ../../gcc/toplev.c:328
0xd0a3e0 add_use_op
        ../../gcc/tree-ssa-operands.c:377
0xd0a3e0 operands_scanner::finalize_ssa_uses()
        ../../gcc/tree-ssa-operands.c:480
0xd0a3e0 operands_scanner::finalize_ssa_stmt_operands()
        ../../gcc/tree-ssa-operands.c:506
0xd0a3e0 operands_scanner::build_ssa_operands()
        ../../gcc/tree-ssa-operands.c:1014
0xd0aa10 update_stmt_operands(function*, gimple*)
        ../../gcc/tree-ssa-operands.c:1155
0xc3a754 update_stmt
        ../../gcc/gimple-ssa.h:175
0xc3a754 mark_def_sites
        ../../gcc/tree-into-ssa.c:649
0xc3a754 mark_def_dom_walker::before_dom_children(basic_block_def*)
        ../../gcc/tree-into-ssa.c:2342
0x13a3e44 dom_walker::walk(basic_block_def*)
        ../../gcc/domwalk.c:309
0xc3cd85 execute
        ../../gcc/tree-into-ssa.c:2459



Configured with --enable-checking=yes :

$ gfortran-11-20200524 -c z1.f90
z1.f90:4:0:

    4 | program p
      |
Error: mismatching comparison operand types
struct __class__STAR_a
integer(kind=4)
if (D.3926 != 0) goto <D.3927>; else goto <D.3928>;
z1.f90:4:0: internal compiler error: 'verify_gimple' failed
0xd9b27d verify_gimple_in_seq(gimple*)
        ../../gcc/tree-cfg.c:5113
0xa526b1 gimplify_body(tree_node*, bool)
        ../../gcc/gimplify.c:14919
0xa52967 gimplify_function_tree(tree_node*)
        ../../gcc/gimplify.c:14990
0x88d9e7 cgraph_node::analyze()
        ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:671
0x890e21 analyze_functions
        ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:1231
0x892042 symbol_table::finalize_compilation_unit()
        ../../gcc/cgraphunit.c:2975

[Bug fortran/95375] ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-06-09

--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
Confirmed.

[Bug fortran/95375] ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[sandra at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sandra at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Current behavior on master is to warn, then ICE:

$ x86_64-linux-gnu-gfortran -c z1.f90
z1.f90:1:0:

    1 | function f() result(n) bind(c)
      | 
......
    6 |       function f() result(n) bind(c)
      |      2
Warning: Type mismatch in function result (INTEGER(4)/CLASS(*)) between (1) and
(2)
z1.f90:4:9:

    4 | program p
      |         ^
Error: mismatching comparison operand types
struct __class__STAR_a
integer(kind=4)
if (D.4230 != 0) goto <D.4231>; else goto <D.4232>;
z1.f90:4:9: internal compiler error: 'verify_gimple' failed
0xfd471d verify_gimple_in_seq(gimple*)
        /scratch/sandra/x86-fsf/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/tree-cfg.c:5229
0xcee7b6 gimplify_body(tree_node*, bool)
        /scratch/sandra/x86-fsf/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/gimplify.c:15913
0xcee97d gimplify_function_tree(tree_node*)
        /scratch/sandra/x86-fsf/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/gimplify.c:15984
0xb1a3b7 cgraph_node::analyze()
        /scratch/sandra/x86-fsf/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cgraphunit.c:670
0xb1cec7 analyze_functions
        /scratch/sandra/x86-fsf/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cgraphunit.c:1234
0xb1db5d symbol_table::finalize_compilation_unit()
        /scratch/sandra/x86-fsf/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/cgraphunit.c:2508
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.

[Bug fortran/95375] ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am wondering why we simply warn in check_against_globals, instead of emitting
an error:

5832      buf[0] = 0;
5833      gfc_compare_interfaces (sym, def_sym, sym->name, 0, 1, buf,
sizeof(buf),
5834                              NULL, NULL, NULL);
5835      if (buf[0] != 0)
5836        {
5837          gfc_warning (0, "%s between %L and %L", buf,
&def_sym->declared_at,
5838                       &sym->declared_at);
5839          sym->error = 1;
5840          def_sym->error = 1;
5841        }

There is also the question why we handle interface checks differently for
bind(c) the way we do now.  If I e.g. revert commit r0-127463, which
added one line in resolve_global_procedure:

2612      if ((sym->attr.if_source == IFSRC_UNKNOWN
2613           || sym->attr.if_source == IFSRC_IFBODY)
2614          && gsym->type != GSYM_UNKNOWN
2615          && !gsym->binding_label       <=== this one here!
2616          && gsym->ns
2617          && gsym->ns->proc_name
2618          && not_in_recursive (sym, gsym->ns)
2619          && not_entry_self_reference (sym, gsym->ns))
2620        {

to disable the global interface check for bind(c), the ICE goes away.
(However, we then regress on gfortran.dg/bind_c_procs_2.f90).

Hackish fix (not regtested):

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.cc b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.cc
index 612c12d233d..41adfe5b715 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/frontend-passes.cc
@@ -5834,8 +5834,12 @@ check_against_globals (gfc_symbol *sym)
                          NULL, NULL, NULL);
   if (buf[0] != 0)
     {
-      gfc_warning (0, "%s between %L and %L", buf, &def_sym->declared_at,
+      if (sym->binding_label)
+       gfc_error ("%s between %L and %L", buf, &def_sym->declared_at,
                   &sym->declared_at);
+      else
+       gfc_warning (0, "%s between %L and %L", buf, &def_sym->declared_at,
+                    &sym->declared_at);
       sym->error = 1;
       def_sym->error = 1;
     }

There is another issue in that we do not detect that

function f() result(n) bind(c)
   class(*), allocatable :: n
end

is likely illegal, i.e. not interoperable.  Intel says:

pr95375.f90(1): error #8522: A result variable of a BIND(C) procedure cannot
have either the ALLOCATABLE or the POINTER attribute.   [F]
function f() result(n) bind(c)
---------^
pr95375.f90(1): error #8624: The result variable of an interoperable function
must itself be interoperable; derived type must be declared with BIND(C).   [F]
function f() result(n) bind(c)
---------^
compilation aborted for pr95375.f90 (code 1)

This should be tracked elsewhere.

[Bug fortran/95375] ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-December/058669.html

[Bug fortran/95375] ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aed5584ff6891560dc567e54517b9722dadc503e

commit r13-4809-gaed5584ff6891560dc567e54517b9722dadc503e
Author: Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Date:   Tue Dec 20 21:17:08 2022 +0100

    Fortran: a C interoperable function cannot have the CLASS attribute
[PR95375]

    gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

            PR fortran/95375
            * decl.cc (verify_bind_c_sym): Extend interoperability check to
            CLASS variables.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            PR fortran/95375
            * gfortran.dg/bind_c_procs_4.f90: New test.

[Bug fortran/95375] ICE in add_use_op, Error: mismatching comparison operand types

[anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95375

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
   Target Milestone|---                         |13.0

--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on mainline for gcc-13.  Closing.

Thanks for the report!