https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
Tim Turner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timturnerc at yahoo dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
Jackie Rosen jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #23 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 13:46 ---
Subject: Bug 40518
Author: redi
Date: Sat Apr 10 13:46:25 2010
New Revision: 158190
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158190
Log:
2010-04-10 Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com
--- Comment #24 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-10 13:48 ---
Fixed for 4.4.4
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to
--- Comment #22 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-09 08:03 ---
I'm unable to bootstrap 4.4 for some reason, I'll try again tomorrow
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #14 from bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com 2010-04-08 06:03
---
(In reply to comment #13)
I agree it's probably not worth backporting to a release branch, it wasn't a
regression.
Haven't affected users written valgrind suppression files by now? :)
Since the races on
--- Comment #15 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-08 09:33
---
Re-open to..
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-08 09:33
---
unassign myself
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-08 09:34
---
.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com 2010-04-08 10:28
---
(In reply to comment #12)
In my opinion it's too late now, I'm not even sure a 4.4.4 will be released
any
time soon, and 4.5.0 is around the corner. But if Jon would also like to see
it
in 4.4.4 and
--- Comment #19 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-08 10:33
---
Please keep in mind that nobody complained so far, over the last ~10 years, and
4.4 is close to its end of life.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #20 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-08 13:51 ---
You can still reduce the helgrind output with just one suppression
{
libstdcxx_std_string_race_pr40518
Helgrind:Race
fun:_ZNSs9_M_mutateEmmm
}
I'm not convinced the impact is severe, COW strings already have
--- Comment #21 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-08 14:04
---
I'll look into backporting it tonight on condition you cease the hyperbole
^
That's why (among other reasons) I voted in favor
--- Comment #11 from bart dot vanassche at gmail dot com 2010-04-07 17:54
---
(In reply to comment #10)
I think this is for mainline only. In a couple of few weeks a I will give it a
second thought for 4_4-branch but certainly isn't a regression.
Any status update here ? Many
--- Comment #12 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-07 18:11
---
In my opinion it's too late now, I'm not even sure a 4.4.4 will be released any
time soon, and 4.5.0 is around the corner. But if Jon would also like to see it
in 4.4.4 and wants to backport the patch I do
--- Comment #13 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-07 19:06 ---
I agree it's probably not worth backporting to a release branch, it wasn't a
regression.
Haven't affected users written valgrind suppression files by now? :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 12:36 ---
Subject: Bug 40518
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Jun 23 12:36:43 2009
New Revision: 148850
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148850
Log:
2009-06-23 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
PR
--- Comment #10 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-23 12:39
---
I think this is for mainline only. In a couple of few weeks a I will give it a
second thought for 4_4-branch but certainly isn't a regression.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 11:05
---
Jon, thanks for clearly pointing out that warning: indeed, at that time I
noticed that in some cases we could overwrite the same values. Anyway, the very
simple attached draft seems then the way to go. Can you
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 11:06
---
Created an attachment (id=18046)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18046action=view)
Draft
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #3 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 11:58
---
That looks good. I didn't run the v3 testsuite, but it fixes the helgrind
errors in the test cases
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 12:01
---
Great. In the meanwhile I did run the testsuite and everything is fine. Let's
wait a bit more, in case something trickier is noticed, and close the issue.
--
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 17:55
---
Jo, I think we need an additional hunk, to deal with s.erase(s.begin(),
s.end()). I'm attaching an updated draft...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 17:56
---
Created an attachment (id=18048)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18048action=view)
Updated
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-06-22 17:56
---
Jon, that is ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
--- Comment #8 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2009-06-22 20:30
---
the revised patch tests ok, no helgrind errors from
std::string s;
s.erase();
s.erase(s.begin(), s.end());
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40518
27 matches
Mail list logo
