[patch, fortan] PR87103 - [OOP] ICE in gfc_new_symbol() due to overlong symbol name

[Andrew Benson]

Thanks Bernhard.

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 9:00:36 PM PDT Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 17:17:37 -0700
> 
> Andrew Benson <abenson@carnegiescience.edu> wrote:
> > This PR is still open - I re-tested the patch on the current trunk. The
> > patch still applies with some line offsets (I've attached the updated
> > patch) and regtests cleanly. It would be very helpful to me to get this
> > patch committed if possible.
> 
> I think Jerry ACKed the patch back then. I'll try to find the time to
> commit it maybe during one of the coming weekends unless someone else
> beats me to it..
> 
> Thanks for the reminder!
> Bernhard
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Andrew
> > 
> > On Wednesday, September 5, 2018 12:35:04 PM PDT Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 03:30, Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle@charter.net> 
wrote:
> > > > On 09/04/2018 10:43 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 18:43, Andrew Benson
> > > > > <abenson@carnegiescience.edu>
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > > >> As suggested by Janus, PR87103 is easily fixed by the attached
> > > > >> patch
> > > > >> which
> > > > >> increases GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN to 76 (sufficient to hold the maximum
> > > > >> allowed F08 symbol length of 63, plus a null terminator, plus the
> > > > >> "__tmp_class_" prefix).> >
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is so much wrong.
> > > > > Note that this will be fixed properly by the changes contained in
> > > > > the
> > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/aldot/for
> > > > > tran
> > > > > -fe-stringpool branch.
> > > > > There we keep the GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN at 63 proper but use an
> > > > > internal
> > > > > buffer double that size which in turn is sufficient to hold all
> > > > > compiler-generated identifiers.
> > > > > See gfc_get_string() even in current TOT.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe we should bite the bullet and start to merge the stringpool
> > > > > changes now instead of this hack?
> > > > 
> > > > It all makes sense to me, please proceed. (my 2 cents worth)
> > > 
> > > Ok so i will reread the fortran-fe-stringpool series and submit it
> > > here for review.
> > > 
> > > Let's return to the issue at hand for a moment, though.
> > > I tested the attached alternate fix on top of the
> > > fortran-fe-stringpool branch where it fixes PR87103.
> > > Maybe somebody has spare cycles to test it on top of current trunk?
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > 
> > > [PATCH,FORTRAN] PR87103: Remove max symbol length check from
> > > gfc_new_symbol
> > > 
> > > gfc_match_name does check for too long names already. Since
> > > gfc_new_symbol is also called for symbols with internal names containing
> > > compiler-generated prefixes, these internal names can easily exceed the
> > > max_identifier_length mandated by the standard.
> > > 
> > > gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
> > > 
> > > 2018-09-04  Bernhard Reutner-Fischer  <aldot@gcc.gnu.org>
> > > 
> > > PR fortran/87103
> > > * expr.c (gfc_check_conformance): Check vsnprintf for truncation.
> > > * iresolve.c (gfc_get_string): Likewise.
> > > * symbol.c (gfc_new_symbol): Remove check for maximum symbol
> > > name length.  Remove redundant 0 setting of new calloc()ed
> > > gfc_symbol.


-- 

* Andrew Benson: http://users.obs.carnegiescience.edu/abenson/contact.html

* Galacticus: https://bitbucket.org/galacticusdev/galacticus