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 7ADF6388C013; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:12:57 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7ADF6388C013
From: "sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/98458] ICE in gfc_conv_array_initializer due to array
 expressions within implied do-loop
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:12:57 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-98458-4-g1G51chkHB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-98458-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-98458-4@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: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:12:57 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D98458

--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> -=
--
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 01:40:22PM +0000, pault at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #6)
>=20
> Hi Steve,
>=20
> I didn't check for any new postings when I attached my version
> of the patch.  Apologies for treading on your toes.... again :-)

You didn't step on any toes.  I think your original patch is
better than mine, because it applies to any place where
is_constant_array_expr() is called.  I suspect your patch is
probably better placed someplace in gfc_simplify_expr(), but
that is for another day.

> > My proposed patch fixes the issue in one spot.  Paul's
> > patch fixes potentially many spots.  Unfortunately, the
> > handling of implied do-loops is done in an ad hoc fashion,
> > and is complicated by the potential problem of exhausting
> > the stack.
>=20
> I like your use of gfc_reduce_init_expr since it also does
> a type check.  Note though that it resets gfc_reduce_init_expr
> and so it needs to be set once again after the call.

Ah, good point about resetting gfc_reduce_init_expr flag.

When debugging the problem, I found that

source=3D[ [1,2], [2,3], [3,4] ]

so the implied do-loop was expanded, but the array was not
simplified to [1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4].  This was causing=20
gfc_simplify_reshape to return NULL.=20

> I had totally forgotten about the 'fatal' flag needing to be
> set in the call to gfc_expand_constructor to avoid stack
> exhaustion. I had to rediscover it experimentally.

implied do-loops in PARAMETER statements have been a problem
for a long time.  I only remember the problem with exhausting
the stack, because I chose flag_max_array_constructor =3D 65535.

> A combined patch is being regtested now.

Thanks.=