Le 21/07/2015 23:10, Paul Richard Thomas a écrit :
Hi Mikael,
This looks fine to me - OK for trunk.
Thanks for the patch
Paul
On 21 July 2015 at 14:53, Mikael Morin <mikael.mo...@sfr.fr> wrote:
Hello,
The fix for PR61831 committed recently [1] introduced/uncovered a NULLL
pointer dereference with iso_varying_string, because a generic symbol (which
has a NULL result) is used as procedure symbol, instead of the specific one.
Fixed by using esym if it's available.
Regression-tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk?
Mikael
[1]: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01389.html
Hello,
I would like to backport the patch.
As the bug was discovered with the patch [1] above, the test
generic_30.f90 works on the branches, which don't have that patch.
Meanwhile, I have managed to find a test generic_31.f90 that exhibits a
wrong code already on the branch, which justifies the backport.
Regression tested on the 5 branch, OK for 5 and 4.9?
Mikael
2015-07-25 Mikael Morin <mik...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/66929
* trans-array.c (gfc_get_proc_ifc_for_expr): Use esym as procedure
symbol if available.
2015-07-25 Mikael Morin <mik...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/66929
* gfortran.dg/generic_30.f90: New.
* gfortran.dg/generic_31.f90: New.
Index: trans-array.c
===================================================================
--- trans-array.c (révision 225979)
+++ trans-array.c (copie de travail)
@@ -9166,7 +9166,11 @@ gfc_get_proc_ifc_for_expr (gfc_expr *procedure_ref
return NULL;
/* Normal procedure case. */
- sym = procedure_ref->symtree->n.sym;
+ if (procedure_ref->expr_type == EXPR_FUNCTION
+ && procedure_ref->value.function.esym)
+ sym = procedure_ref->value.function.esym;
+ else
+ sym = procedure_ref->symtree->n.sym;
/* Typebound procedure case. */
for (ref = procedure_ref->ref; ref; ref = ref->next)
! { dg-do compile }
!
! PR fortran/66929
! Generic procedures as actual argument used to lead to
! a NULL pointer dereference in gfc_get_proc_ifc_for_expr
! because the generic symbol was used as procedure symbol,
! instead of the specific one.
module iso_varying_string
type, public :: varying_string
character(LEN=1), dimension(:), allocatable :: chars
end type varying_string
interface operator(/=)
module procedure op_ne_VS_CH
end interface operator (/=)
interface trim
module procedure trim_
end interface
contains
elemental function op_ne_VS_CH (string_a, string_b) result (op_ne)
type(varying_string), intent(in) :: string_a
character(LEN=*), intent(in) :: string_b
logical :: op_ne
op_ne = .true.
end function op_ne_VS_CH
elemental function trim_ (string) result (trim_string)
type(varying_string), intent(in) :: string
type(varying_string) :: trim_string
trim_string = varying_string(["t", "r", "i", "m", "m", "e", "d"])
end function trim_
end module iso_varying_string
module syntax_rules
use iso_varying_string, string_t => varying_string
contains
subroutine set_rule_type_and_key
type(string_t) :: key
if (trim (key) /= "") then
print *, "non-empty"
end if
end subroutine set_rule_type_and_key
end module syntax_rules
! { dg-do run }
!
! PR fortran/66929
! Check that the specific FIRST symbol is used for the call to FOO,
! so that the J argument is not assumed to be present
module m
interface foo
module procedure first
end interface foo
contains
elemental function bar(j) result(r)
integer, intent(in), optional :: j
integer :: r, s(2)
! We used to have NULL dereference here, in case of a missing J argument
s = foo(j, [3, 7])
r = sum(s)
end function bar
elemental function first(i, j) result(r)
integer, intent(in), optional :: i
integer, intent(in) :: j
integer :: r
if (present(i)) then
r = i
else
r = -5
end if
end function first
end module m
program p
use m
integer :: i
i = bar()
if (i /= -10) call abort
end program p
