public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Cc: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,        jason@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Fix logic bug in Cilk Plus array expansion
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2016 08:21:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160102082141.GD18720@tucnak.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56875ADA.6090805@redhat.com>

On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 10:06:34PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> >gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
> >
> >	* cp-array-notation.c (cp_expand_cond_array_notations): Return
> >	error_mark_node only if find_rank failed, not if it was
> >	successful.
> Can you use -fdump-tree-original in the testcase and verify there's no <<<
> error >>> expressions in the resulting dump file?
> 
> With that change, this is OK.

I think the patch is incomplete.  Because, find_rank does not always emit
an error if it returns false, so we again have cases where we can get
error_mark_node in the code without error being emitted.
      else if (*rank != current_rank)
        {
          /* In this case, find rank is being recursed through a set of
             expression of the form A <OPERATION> B, where A and B both have
             array notations in them and the rank of A is not equal to rank of B.
             A simple example of such case is the following: X[:] + Y[:][:] */
          *rank = current_rank;
          return false;
        }
and other spots.  E.g.
                  if (prev_arg && EXPR_HAS_LOCATION (prev_arg))
                    error_at (EXPR_LOCATION (prev_arg),
                              "rank mismatch between %qE and %qE", prev_arg,
                              TREE_OPERAND (expr, ii));
looks very suspicious.

	Jakub

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-02  8:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-31 15:40 Patrick Palka
2015-12-31 15:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] Treat a gimplification failure as an internal error Patrick Palka
2016-01-11  3:21   ` Patrick Palka
2016-01-14 21:31     ` Jeff Law
2016-02-05 14:59       ` Patrick Palka
2015-12-31 15:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] Avoid creating an initializer for a flexible array member Patrick Palka
2016-01-03 20:14   ` Martin Sebor
2016-01-11  3:17     ` Patrick Palka
2016-01-02  5:06 ` [PATCH 1/3] Fix logic bug in Cilk Plus array expansion Jeff Law
2016-01-02  8:21   ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2016-01-02 23:26     ` Patrick Palka
2016-01-04 18:35       ` Jeff Law
2016-01-11  3:55         ` Patrick Palka
2016-01-14 21:06           ` Jeff Law
2016-01-15  4:07             ` Patrick Palka

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160102082141.GD18720@tucnak.redhat.com \
    --to=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jason@redhat.com \
    --cc=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=patrick@parcs.ath.cx \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).