| Summary: | [meta-bug] -fbounds-check related bugs | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | gcc | Reporter: | Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert> |
| Component: | fortran | Assignee: | Not yet assigned to anyone <unassigned> |
| Status: | NEW --- | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | anlauf, d, dfranke, gcc-bugs, P.Schaffnit, tkoenig, tobias.burnus |
| Priority: | P3 | Keywords: | meta-bug |
| Version: | 4.2.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Host: | Target: | ||
| Build: | Known to work: | ||
| Known to fail: | Last reconfirmed: | 2006-05-24 21:51:10 | |
| Bug Depends on: | 31059, 34740, 36683, 39772, 44744, 45057, 45425, 77649, 81095, 82243, 82660, 83953, 86033, 90795, 111339, 19777, 24401, 26801, 27524, 27588, 27765, 27786, 27874, 27965, 27989, 28129, 28849, 29572, 29677, 29800, 29804, 30073, 30402, 30655, 30802, 30814, 30939, 31119, 31278, 31538, 31627, 31822, 32036, 32315, 32317, 32454, 32890, 33254, 33745, 34159, 34546, 34670, 34741, 35732, 35943, 36029, 36112, 36341, 36670, 36754, 37746, 37802, 38235, 39195, 39286, 39872, 39994, 40383, 52162, 52788, 60370, 71706, 85631, 86100 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Francois-Xavier Coudert
2006-05-24 21:46:12 UTC
With gfortran mainline 20060517 (and the patch for PR 27524), here is a list of failures recorder when the testsuite is run with -fbounds-check (command line is make check-gfortran RUNTESTFLAGS="-target_board=unix/-fbounds-check"): gfortran.dg/aliasing_dummy_1.f90 gfortran.dg/cray_pointers_2.f90 gfortran.dg/pr15140.f90 gfortran.dg/pr25603.f gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.12.1.f90 gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.30.1.f90 gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.31.1.f90 gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.31.2.f90 gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.8.1.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/assumed_size.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/forall_3.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/where_7.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/where_8.f90 (In reply to comment #1) > make check-gfortran RUNTESTFLAGS="-target_board=unix/-fbounds-check" With mainline today and the patch for PR 19777, the list is failure is now: gfortran.dg/cray_pointers_2.f90 gfortran.dg/pr15140.f90 gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/assumed_size.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/forall_3.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/where_7.f90 gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/where_8.f90 Failures at the moment: FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O0 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O1 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O2 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -g scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -Os scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -Os execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/ltrans-7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times ltrans "transformed loop" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -Os execution test Running /home/ig25/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/gomp.exp ... Running /home/ig25/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect.exp ... FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/pr19049.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "complicated access pattern" 1 (In reply to comment #3) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O0 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 This is due to a false positive because "memset" in the error message (due to the filename) matches more than two times. Current failures with bounds checking: FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O0 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O1 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O2 scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -O3 -g scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 -Os scan-tree-dump-times original "memset" 2 FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 -Os execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -Os execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/ldist-1.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times ldist "distributed: split to 4 loops" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/ltrans-7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times ltrans "transformed loop" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr37243.f -Os execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/reassoc_4.f -O scan-tree-dump-times reassoc1 "[0-9] \* " 22 FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f -Os execution test Running /home/ig25/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/gomp.exp ... Running /home/ig25/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/graphite/graphite.exp ... Running /home/ig25/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect.exp ... FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/pr19049.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "complicated access pattern" 1 (1) It seems that the failure of gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90 comes from a too broad regexp for scan-tree-dump-times: grep memset array_memset_2.f90.003t.original gives
_gfortran_runtime_error_at (&"At line 8 of file /opt/gcc/_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}, &"Array reference out of bounds, upper bound of dimension 2 of array \'a\' exceeded (%ld > %ld)"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}, 1, (<unnamed-signed:32>) ubound.2);
_gfortran_runtime_error_at (&"At line 8 of file /opt/gcc/_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}, &"Array reference out of bounds, upper bound of dimension 2 of array \'a\' exceeded (%ld > %ld)"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}, (<unnamed-signed:32>) NON_LVALUE_EXPR <D.1514>, (<unnamed-signed:32>) ubound.2);
_gfortran_runtime_error_at (&"At line 8 of file /opt/gcc/_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/array_memset_2.f90"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}, &"Array reference out of bounds for array \'a\', upper bound of dimension 1 exceeded (%ld > %ld)"[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}, 1, (<unnamed-signed:32>) ubound.0);
(void) __builtin_memset ((void *) &b, 0, 8);
(void) __builtin_memset ((void *) &c, 0, 8);
Either the regexp or the name of the test should be changed.
(2) The failure of gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 comes from " Incorrect size in SOURCE argument to RESHAPE intrinsic: is 9, should be 4". This is wrong, the standard says:
"If PAD is absent or of size zero, the size of SOURCE shall be greater than or equal to PRODUCT (SHAPE)."
(3) I think the failure of gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90: "Array reference out of bounds for array 'p', upper bound of dimension 1 exceeded (4 > 3)", is also wrong.
(In reply to comment #6) > (2) The failure of gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 comes from " Incorrect size in > SOURCE argument to RESHAPE intrinsic: is 9, should be 4". This is wrong, the > standard says: > > "If PAD is absent or of size zero, the size of SOURCE shall be greater than or > equal to PRODUCT (SHAPE)." You're right; this is now PR 38234. > (3) I think the failure of gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90: "Array reference out of > bounds for array 'p', upper bound of dimension 1 exceeded (4 > 3)", is also > wrong. This is PR 36091. We should run the testsuite with -fbounds-check to catch this kind of thing. For gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f the failure comes from the old style array declaration:
double precision dx(1), cutlo, cuthi, hitest, sum, xmax,zero,one
If 'dx(1)' is replaced by 'dx(*)', -fbounds-check does not detect any error (which may be wrong, but I don't think there is any way to detect the problem with a local analysis).
In addition to comment #8, the bound check would be possible using: double precision dx(n), cutlo, cuthi, hitest, sum, xmax,zero,one With the following changes: Only in ../_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/: array_memset_2.f90 Only in gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/: array_setmem_2.f90 --- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr37243.f 2008-09-04 19:10:20.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr37243.f 2008-11-23 22:54:23.000000000 +0100 @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ IF (J .GT. N) GO TO 320 DO 240 K = 1,N 240 V(K,I) = ZERO - CALL DAXPY(N,DUM,V(1,II),1,V(1,I),1) + CALL DAXPY(N,DUM,V(1,I),1,V(1,I),1) 260 CONTINUE DUMI = ZERO DO 280 K = 1,N --- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f 2007-11-07 10:25:55.000000000 +0100 +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/g77/dnrm2.f 2008-11-23 22:53:37.000000000 +0100 @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ double precision function dnrm2 ( n, dx, incx) integer i, incx, ix, j, n, next - double precision dx(1), cutlo, cuthi, hitest, sum, xmax,zero,one + double precision dx(n), cutlo, cuthi, hitest, sum, xmax,zero,one data zero, one /0.0d0, 1.0d0/ data cutlo, cuthi / 8.232d-11, 1.304d19 / j = 0 I only get the following failures with -fbounds-check: FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/forall_13.f90 -Os execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/ldist-1.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times ldist "distributed: split to 4 loops" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/ltrans-7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times ltrans "transformed loop" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/reassoc_4.f -O scan-tree-dump-times reassoc1 "[0-9] \* " 22 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-3.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/vect-5.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 FAIL: gfortran.dg/vect/pr19049.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times vect "complicated access pattern" 1 So, but for pr36091, the failures are expected regexps changed by -fbounds-check which is not too surprising. PR27989 and PR30939 essentially describe the same problem, once with an implicit, once with an explicit interface. The explicit case is sort-of solved, the implicit case will be if we ever get whole-file checking. Do we need to keep both open? Can we merge them, close both and/or open a new one that clarifies what needs to be done? (In reply to comment #11) Count PR32317 in as well. |