http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337

           Summary: Internal error: eh.c 41 - alloca & synchronized(this)
           Product: D
           Version: 1.018
          Platform: PC
               URL: http://paste.dprogramming.com/dpz51jpz.php
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
          Severity: major
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: bugzilla@digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: a.panek@brainsware.org


It seems like the combination of memory allocated with stdc's alloca() function
and synchronized(this) [as shown in the outcommented code in the paste] cause
an internal error in eh.c.

Neither a D-way copy ..

    synchronized (this)
        list[] = queueList;

..nor a memcpy..

    synchronized (this)
        memcpy (list.ptr, queueList.ptr, len * (QueueFile*).sizeof);

fixed this error.

It has been worked around via creating a synchronized copy method to perform the same action.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337





------- Comment #1 from bugzilla@digitalmars.com  2007-07-12 18:06 -------
Please provide a complete reproducible sample.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337


Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |clugdbug@yahoo.com.au
            Summary|Internal error: eh.c 41 -   |ICE(eh.c) No test case
                   |alloca & synchronized(this) |




--- Comment #2 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au>  2009-05-26 01:00:32 PDT ---
Original title was:
Internal error: eh.c 41 - alloca & synchronized(this)

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337


Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID




--- Comment #3 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au>  2009-07-10 00:03:11 PDT ---
As this has been open for 2 years without anyone providing a complete test case, I'm closing this as invalid. Reopen if you have a test case.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337





--- Comment #4 from Sobirari Muhomori <maxmo@pochta.ru>  2009-07-10 04:41:07 PDT ---
This can be a test case, I didn't check it for 1.018, it works on 2.031.

---
struct QueueFile{ int size,channel; }
class A
{
   QueueFile[] queueList;
   final synchronized void copy (QueueFile[] dst, QueueFile src[])
   {
      dst[] = src;
   }
   final void watchdog ()
   {
      auto len = queueList.length;
      auto list = (cast(QueueFile*) alloca(len * QueueFile.sizeof))[0..len];

      // clone the list of queues to avoid stalling everything
      //copy (list, queueList);

      synchronized (this)
         memcpy (list.ptr, queueList.ptr, len * (QueueFile*).sizeof);
         //list[] = queueList;

      foreach (q; list)
      {
         if (q.size)
             writeln (q.channel);
         //if (q.isDirty)
         //{
         //    q.flush;
         //    log.info ("flushed "~q.channel.name~" to disk");
         //}
      }
   }
}
---

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337


Brad Roberts <braddr@puremagic.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
                 CC|                            |braddr@puremagic.com
         Resolution|INVALID                     |




--- Comment #5 from Brad Roberts <braddr@puremagic.com>  2009-07-10 10:35:03 PDT ---
Reopening so the new code can be looked at.  However...

Term clarification 'it works on 2.031'?  Does that mean that it compiles successfully or unsuccessfully?  If unsuccessfully, with the same error?  If it's not the same error, please include the current error message.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337





--- Comment #6 from Sobirari Muhomori <maxmo@pochta.ru>  2009-07-13 01:21:21 PDT ---
compiles successfully

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1337


Brad Roberts <braddr@puremagic.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID




--- Comment #7 from Brad Roberts <braddr@puremagic.com>  2009-07-27 00:52:38 PDT ---
Reclosing.

If the new example code compiles, then it's not exactly a repro case for the bug, unless it failed to compile with an older version of the code.  Without good info, I agree with Don's assessment.. might as well close it as an invalid bug report.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------