Re: [PATCH v4] c++: Fix value-init crash in template [PR93676]

[Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 05:15:45PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 2/20/20 11:52 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:13:07AM +0000, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 2/19/20 10:15 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:24:30AM +0100, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > > > On 2/11/20 8:54 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > > > Since <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00556.html> we
> > > > > > attempt to value-initialize in build_vec_init even when there's no
> > > > > > initializer but the type has a constexpr default constructor.  But
> > > > > > build_value_init doesn't work in templates, so I think let's avoid
> > > > > > this scenario; we'll go to the normal build_aggr_init path then.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk and branches?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 	PR c++/93676 - value-init crash in template.
> > > > > > 	* init.c (build_vec_init): Don't perform value-init in a template.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hmm, we really shouldn't even be calling build_vec_init in a template, that
> > > > > builds up a lot of garbage that we'll throw away at the end of build_new.
> > > > 
> > > > Ah, it's true that build_new will just creates a NEW_EXPR in a template and
> > > > doesn't use the result of build_new_1.  Unfortunately I can't just call
> > > > build_special_member_call like we do in build_new_1 since that crashes for
> > > > array types.
> > > 
> > > We should call it for strip_array_types (type).
> > 
> > Since build_special_member_call takes an expression we'd have to modify
> > its type which I think is not pretty, but it works.  Is this along the
> > lines you had in mind?
> 
> 
> 
> > I think I still like the v1 patch best but if you're fine with the
> > following, then am I.
> > 
> > -- >8 --
> > Since <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00556.html> we
> > attempt to value-initialize in build_vec_init even when there's no
> > initializer but the type has a constexpr default constructor.  But
> > build_value_init doesn't work in templates, and build_vec_init
> > creates a lot of garbage that would not be used anyway, so don't
> > call it in a template.
> > 
> > 	PR c++/93676 - value-init crash in template.
> > 	* init.c (build_new_1): Don't call build_vec_init in a template.
> > 
> > 	* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C: New test.
> > ---
> >   gcc/cp/init.c                                 |  6 +++++-
> >   gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C | 13 +++++++++++++
> >   2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >   create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C
> > 
> > diff --git a/gcc/cp/init.c b/gcc/cp/init.c
> > index d480660445e..c60f332313a 100644
> > --- a/gcc/cp/init.c
> > +++ b/gcc/cp/init.c
> > @@ -3511,13 +3511,17 @@ build_new_1 (vec<tree, va_gc> **placement, tree type, tree nelts,
> >   	  explicit_value_init_p = true;
> >   	}
> > -      if (processing_template_decl && explicit_value_init_p)
> > +      if (processing_template_decl)
> >   	{
> >   	  /* build_value_init doesn't work in templates, and we don't need
> >   	     the initializer anyway since we're going to throw it away and
> >   	     rebuild it at instantiation time, so just build up a single
> >   	     constructor call to get any appropriate diagnostics.  */
> >   	  init_expr = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (data_addr);
> > +	  /* Avoid an ICE when converting to a base in build_simple_base_path.
> > +	     We'll throw this all away anyway, and build_new will create
> > +	     a NEW_EXPR.  */
> > +	  TREE_TYPE (init_expr) = strip_array_types (TREE_TYPE (init_expr));
> 
> instead of this, how about casting data_addr to elt_type* before
> cp_build_fold_indirect_ref?

That seems to work, thanks!

Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?

-- >8 --
Since <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00556.html> we
attempt to value-initialize in build_vec_init even when there's no
initializer but the type has a constexpr default constructor.  But
build_value_init doesn't work in templates, and build_vec_init
creates a lot of garbage that would not be used anyway, so don't
call it in a template.

	PR c++/93676 - value-init crash in template.
	* init.c (build_new_1): Don't call build_vec_init in a template.

	* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C: New test.
---
 gcc/cp/init.c                                 |  6 +++++-
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C | 13 +++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C

diff --git a/gcc/cp/init.c b/gcc/cp/init.c
index d480660445e..31a130422af 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/init.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/init.c
@@ -3511,8 +3511,12 @@ build_new_1 (vec<tree, va_gc> **placement, tree type, tree nelts,
 	  explicit_value_init_p = true;
 	}
 
-      if (processing_template_decl && explicit_value_init_p)
+      if (processing_template_decl)
 	{
+	  /* Avoid an ICE when converting to a base in build_simple_base_path.
+	     We'll throw this all away anyway, and build_new will create
+	     a NEW_EXPR.  */
+	  data_addr = build_nop (build_pointer_type (elt_type), data_addr);
 	  /* build_value_init doesn't work in templates, and we don't need
 	     the initializer anyway since we're going to throw it away and
 	     rebuild it at instantiation time, so just build up a single
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..f3e2cb87fd6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template19.C
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+// PR c++/93676 - value-init crash in template.
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+struct P {
+  int x = 0;
+};
+
+template<class T>
+struct S {
+  S() { new P[2][2]; }
+};
+
+S<int> s;

base-commit: a71f2193d0df71a86c4743aab22891bb0003112e
-- 
Marek Polacek • Red Hat, Inc. • 300 A St, Boston, MA