> On Sun, 20 Sep 2020, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > this is patch I am using to fix the assumed_alias_type.f90 failure by
> > simply arranging alias set 0 for the problematic array descriptor.
>
> There's no such named testcase on trunk. Can you be more specific
> as to the problem at hand? It looks like gfortran.dg/assumed_type_9.f90
> execute FAILs at the moment.
>
> In particular how's this not an issue w/o IPA modref?
>
> For TYPE(*) I think the object itself cannot be accessed but for
> arrays the meta-info in the array descriptor can. Now my question
> would be why the Fortran FE at the call site does not build an
> appropriately typed array descriptor?
>
> CCing the fortran list.
The problem is:
alsize (struct array15_unknown & restrict a)
{
...
_2 = *a_13(D).dtype.rank;
_3 = (integer(kind=8)) _2;
...
}
}
and in main:
struct array02_integer(kind=4) am;
<bb 6> :
MEM <c_char[8]> [(struct dtype_type *)&am + 24B] = {};
am.dtype.elem_len = 4;
am.dtype.rank = 2;
am.dtype.type = 1;
...
_52 = alsize (&am);
Here array15_unknown and array02_integer are different structures with
different canonical types and thus we end up disambiguating the accesses
via base alias sets.
My understanding is that this _unknown array descriptor is supposed to
be universal and work with all kinds of arrays.
Wihtout modref this works because alsize is not inlined (we think code
size would grow). Forcing inliner to inline stil leads to working code
because we first constant propagate the pointer and then we see accesses
from same base DECL thus bypass the TBAA checks. Disabling the
constant propagation leads to wrong code as wel.
Honza
