[Bug target/98878] Incorrect multilib list for riscv*-rtems

2021-01-28 Thread sebastian.huber--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98878

--- Comment #1 from Sebastian Huber  ---
It may have something to do with TARGET_RISCV_DEFAULT_ABI == ilp32d. The
gcc/tm.h in the build tree contains this:

gcc/tm.h:#ifndef TARGET_RISCV_DEFAULT_ARCH
gcc/tm.h:# define TARGET_RISCV_DEFAULT_ARCH rv32gc
gcc/tm.h:#ifndef TARGET_RISCV_DEFAULT_ABI
gcc/tm.h:# define TARGET_RISCV_DEFAULT_ABI ilp32d

The rv32imafd/ilp32d multilib is the only multilib (except ".") which has also
this ABI. This could be checked by adding a rv32imfd/ilp32d multilib for
example.

[Bug debug/98875] DWARF5 as default causes perf probe to hang

2021-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98875

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener  ---
With perf you'll have to use -gdwarf-4 anyway since otherwise it cannot parse
debug in my experience.  Quite some tools need to be brought up-to-date with
DWARF5 yet.

[Bug target/98872] ICE leads to SEGV on MMA test case

2021-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98872

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|11.0|---

[Bug target/98870] [11 regression] assembler output count off for gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 after r11-6959

2021-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98870

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug tree-optimization/98866] [11 Regresion] Compile time hog in VRP since r11-3685-gfcae5121154d1c33

2021-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98866

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug target/98878] New: Incorrect multilib list for riscv*-rtems

2021-01-28 Thread kito at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98878

Bug ID: 98878
   Summary: Incorrect multilib list for riscv*-rtems
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
  Assignee: kito at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: kito at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de, wilson at gcc dot 
gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Target: riscv32-rtems

Sebastian has reported multilib generation for RTEM is broken after
g:a5ad5d5c478ee7bebf057161bb8715ee7d286875.

GCC configure: --with-arch=rv32gc --with-abi=ilp32 --target=riscv32-rtems.

Before this commit g:a5ad5d5c478ee7bebf057161bb8715ee7d286875:

./gcc/xgcc -print-multi-lib
.;
rv32i/ilp32;@march=rv32i@mabi=ilp32
rv32im/ilp32;@march=rv32im@mabi=ilp32
rv32imafd/ilp32d;@march=rv32imafd@mabi=ilp32d <-- HERE
rv32iac/ilp32;@march=rv32iac@mabi=ilp32
rv32imac/ilp32;@march=rv32imac@mabi=ilp32
rv32imafc/ilp32f;@march=rv32imafc@mabi=ilp32f
rv64imafd/lp64d;@march=rv64imafd@mabi=lp64d
rv64imafd/lp64d/medany;@march=rv64imafd@mabi=lp64d@mcmodel=medany
rv64imac/lp64;@march=rv64imac@mabi=lp64
rv64imac/lp64/medany;@march=rv64imac@mabi=lp64@mcmodel=medany
rv64imafdc/lp64d;@march=rv64imafdc@mabi=lp64d
rv64imafdc/lp64d/medany;@march=rv64imafdc@mabi=lp64d@mcmodel=medany

./gcc/xgcc -print-multi-directory -march=rv32imafd -mabi=ilp32d
rv32imafd/ilp32d


After this commit g:a5ad5d5c478ee7bebf057161bb8715ee7d286875:

./gcc/xgcc -print-multi-lib
.;
rv32i/ilp32;@march=rv32i@mabi=ilp32
rv32im/ilp32;@march=rv32im@mabi=ilp32
rv32iac/ilp32;@march=rv32iac@mabi=ilp32
rv32imac/ilp32;@march=rv32imac@mabi=ilp32
rv32imafc/ilp32f;@march=rv32imafc@mabi=ilp32f
rv64imafd/lp64d;@march=rv64imafd@mabi=lp64d
rv64imafd/lp64d/medany;@march=rv64imafd@mabi=lp64d@mcmodel=medany
rv64imac/lp64;@march=rv64imac@mabi=lp64
rv64imac/lp64/medany;@march=rv64imac@mabi=lp64@mcmodel=medany
rv64imafdc/lp64d;@march=rv64imafdc@mabi=lp64d
rv64imafdc/lp64d/medany;@march=rv64imafdc@mabi=lp64d@mcmodel=medany

./gcc/xgcc -print-multi-directory -march=rv32imafd -mabi=ilp32d
rv32imafd/ilp32d


---

The difference is rv32imafd/ilp32d is disappeared from the output of
-print-multi-directory, the gcc think that could reuse the default library, but
it's not true, but seems like -print-multi-directory is doing right here.

[Bug tree-optimization/98868] [8/9/10/11 Regression] polyhedron rnflow.f90 regression since r8-2555-g344be1fd47d7d64e

2021-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98868

Richard Biener  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |8.5
   Last reconfirmed||2021-01-29
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |rguenth at gcc dot 
gnu.org
   Keywords||missed-optimization
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener  ---
I will have a look.

[Bug target/98877] [AArch64] Inefficient code generated for tbl NEON intrinsics

2021-01-28 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98877

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Depends on||91753

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski  ---
See PR 91753 for another example.


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91753
[Bug 91753] Bad register allocation of multi-register types

[Bug target/98877] [AArch64] Inefficient code generated for tbl NEON intrinsics

2021-01-28 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98877

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski  ---
I am 90% sure this is just a register allocation issue.

[Bug middle-end/98209] [8/9/10/11 Regression] printf failed with O1 or above

2021-01-28 Thread rguenther at suse dot de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98209

--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de  ---
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98209
> 
> Jakub Jelinek  changed:
> 
>What|Removed |Added
> 
>  CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
> 
> --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
> But e.g. for the *intrin.h intrinsics, ignoring the ISA requirements that it
> got from the target pragmas is highly undesirable, we do need the diagnostics
> and refuse to inline them, otherwise they will ICE all over.
> And it is unclear how to differentiate between ISA requirements that were 
> added
> because of the command line option flags vs. ISA requirements that got added
> through target pragmas or target attributes.

For select cases we have sth like cfun->uses_math and chose to ignore
some (target specific) settings based on things we use in the IL.  We
could go much further here (but of course _not_ scan the IL in the
respective function - we'd have to pre-compute things somehow, like
adding target specific fields in the inline summary / merging and
when computing that, allow the target to amend).

I think the *intrin.h example is not really relevant as their direct
caller is very unlikely to differ in setting.

[Bug tree-optimization/98848] [9/10/11 regression] vectorizer failed to reduce max pattern since r9-1590

2021-01-28 Thread rguenther at suse dot de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98848

--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de  ---
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98848
> 
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
> Alternatively, couldn't we support truncation in the reductions if
> SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO suggests that the values are always in the narrower range?

Yes, we probably could.  But note that changes in reduction support
are quite fragile and we're currently just set up for sign changes
(via emitting V_C_E) but not required promotions/demotions so
there would be a lot of changes needed.  It's also not clear
promoting/demoting the reduction IV all the time is doing any good
(unless you suggest that we'd magically undo the pattern by promoting
the non-reduction OP instead - but that would require even more changes).

So I guess the better approach might be to somehow allow late "undoing"
of pattern recog (but it's a bit complicated because of how that 
influences VF compute and also relevant/liveness compute).

[Bug target/98877] New: [AArch64] Inefficient code generated for tbl NEON intrinsics

2021-01-28 Thread spop at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98877

Bug ID: 98877
   Summary: [AArch64] Inefficient code generated for tbl NEON
intrinsics
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: spop at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

The use of NEON intrinsics is inefficient and leads developers to prefer inline
assembly instead of intrinsics.

A similar performance bug for vmlal intrinsics was reported in
https://gcc.gnu.org/PR92665
The code generated by GCC for table lookups is also inefficient:

$ cat red.c
#include "arm_neon.h"

uint8x16_t fun(uint8x16_t lo, uint8x16_t hi, uint8x16_t idx) {
  uint8x16x2_t tab = { .val = {lo, hi} };
  uint8x16_t res = vqtbl2q_u8(tab, idx);
  return res;
}

$ gcc -O3 -S -o- red.c
fun:
mov v4.16b, v0.16b
mov v5.16b, v1.16b
tbl v0.16b, {v4.16b - v5.16b}, v2.16b
ret

$ clang -O3 -S -o- red.c
fun:
tbl v0.16b, { v0.16b, v1.16b }, v2.16b
ret

[Bug demangler/98876] New: demangler-warning: unable to demangle

2021-01-28 Thread kazantsev.ernest at mail dot ru via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98876

Bug ID: 98876
   Summary: demangler-warning: unable to demangle
   Product: gcc
   Version: 7.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: demangler
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: kazantsev.ernest at mail dot ru
  Target Milestone: ---

The demangler in GDB crashes on the symbol below.

GNU gdb (Linaro_GDB-2019.02) 8.2.1.20190122
This GDB was configured as "x86_64_arm-linux-gnueabihf".

Boost Version 1.70.0

>&"/home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg-make-release_0/snapshots/binutils-gdb.git~gdb-8.2-branch/gdb/cp-support.c:1581:
> demangler-warning: unable to demangle 
>'_ZTSN5boost6spirit2x311alternativeINS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS1_6actionINS1_17binary_lit_parserIihLNS_6endian5orderE1ELj8EEEN7msgpack2v26detailUlRT_E2_EEENS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E3_ENS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E4_ENS3_INS3_INS1_17any_binary_parserIhLS6_1ELj8EEEZNKSA_UlhhE_clEhhEUlSC_E_EENSA_UlSC_E5_ENS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E6_ENS1_8sequenceIS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E7_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_INSL_ItLS6_0ELj16EEENSA_UlSC_E8_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_INSL_IjLS6_0ELj32EEENSA_UlSC_E9_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_INSL_IyLS6_0ELj64EEENSA_UlSC_E10_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E11_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E12_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E13_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS1B_NSA_UlSC_E14_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E15_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS1B_NSA_UlSC_E16_EEENSW_INS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E17_EEENS3_INS1_13raw_directiveINSW_INS1_6kleeneINSW_INS3_INS1_10eps_parserENSA_UlSC_E0_EEENS1_8any_charINS0_13char_encoding8standardEEENS3_IS28_NSA_UlSC_E1_EEENSA_UlSC_E18_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E19_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E20_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E21_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E22_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E23_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E24_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E25_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E26_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E27_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E28_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E29_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E30_EEENSW_INSW_INS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E31_EEENS27_INSW_IS2A_NS1_4ruleINSA_11array_itemsENS1_11unused_typeELb0ES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E32_ES42_EES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E33_ES42_EES2I_NSW_INSW_INS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E34_EEENS27_INSW_IS2A_NS3X_INSA_9map_itemsES3Z_Lb0ES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E35_ES4N_EES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E36_ES4N_EES2I_NSW_INS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E37_EEENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E38_EEENSW_INS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E39_EEENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E40_EEENSW_INS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E41_EEENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E42_EEE'
> (demangler failed with signal 11)\nUnable to dump core, use `ulimit -c 
>unlimited' before executing GDB next time.\n"
>~"/home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg-make-release_0/snapshots/binutils-gdb.git~gdb-8.2-branch/gdb/cp-support.c:1595:
> demangler-warning: unable to demangle 
>'_ZTSN5boost6spirit2x311alternativeINS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS2_INS1_6actionINS1_17binary_lit_parserIihLNS_6endian5orderE1ELj8EEEN7msgpack2v26detailUlRT_E2_EEENS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E3_ENS3_IS7_NSA_UlSC_E4_ENS3_INS3_INS1_17any_binary_parserIhLS6_1ELj8EEEZNKSA_UlhhE_clEhhEUlSC_E_EENSA_UlSC_E5_ENS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E6_ENS1_8sequenceIS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E7_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_INSL_ItLS6_0ELj16EEENSA_UlSC_E8_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_INSL_IjLS6_0ELj32EEENSA_UlSC_E9_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_INSL_IyLS6_0ELj64EEENSA_UlSC_E10_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E11_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E12_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E13_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS1B_NSA_UlSC_E14_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E15_EEENSW_IS7_NS3_IS1B_NSA_UlSC_E16_EEENSW_INS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E17_EEENS3_INS1_13raw_directiveINSW_INS1_6kleeneINSW_INS3_INS1_10eps_parserENSA_UlSC_E0_EEENS1_8any_charINS0_13char_encoding8standardEEENS3_IS28_NSA_UlSC_E1_EEENSA_UlSC_E18_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E19_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E20_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E21_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E22_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E23_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E24_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_ISM_NSA_UlSC_E25_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E26_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E27_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E28_EEENSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E29_ENS3_IS2K_NSA_UlSC_E30_EEENSW_INSW_INS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E31_EEENS27_INSW_IS2A_NS1_4ruleINSA_11array_itemsENS1_11unused_typeELb0ES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E32_ES42_EES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS16_NSA_UlSC_E33_ES42_EES2I_NSW_INSW_INS3_ISP_NSA_UlSC_E34_EEENS27_INSW_IS2A_NS3X_INSA_9map_itemsES3Z_Lb0ES2I_NSW_INSW_INSW_IS7_NS3_IS11_NSA_UlSC_E35_EE

[Bug c++/98355] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in has_attribute, at c-family/c-attribs.c:5628

2021-01-28 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98355

Marek Polacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek  ---
My earlier fix to emit sorry rather than ICE didn't catch this case; this patch
fixes that:

--- a/gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -8934,7 +8934,7 @@ cp_parser_has_attribute_expression (cp_parser *parser)
 {
   if (oper == error_mark_node)
/* Nothing.  */;
-  else if (type_dependent_expression_p (oper))
+  else if (uses_template_parms (oper))
sorry_at (atloc, "%<__builtin_has_attribute%> with dependent argument "
  "not supported yet");
   else

[Bug c++/96137] [11 Regression] GCC hang on in invalid function definition

2021-01-28 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96137

Marek Polacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek  ---
Fixed.

[Bug c++/96137] [11 Regression] GCC hang on in invalid function definition

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96137

--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8f5388c9e94d4324c31d82b335fa138518e3171

commit r11-6967-gf8f5388c9e94d4324c31d82b335fa138518e3171
Author: Marek Polacek 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 22:18:32 2021 -0500

c++: Fix infinite looping with invalid operator [PR96137]

My r11-86 adjusted cp_parser_class_name to do

-  scope = parser->scope;
+  scope = parser->scope ? parser->scope : parser->context->object_type;
   if (scope == error_mark_node)
 return error_mark_node;

but that caused endless looping in cp_parser_type_specifier_seq (the
while (true) loop) in this invalid test, because we never set a parser
error, therefore cp_parser_type_specifier returned error_mark_node
instead of NULL_TREE, and we never issued the "expected type-specifier"
error.

At first I thought I'd just add cp_parser_simulate_error right before
the return, but that regresses crash81.C -- we'd emit multiple errors
for "T::X".  So the next best thing seemed to revert to pre-r11-86
behavior: return early when parser->scope is bad, otherwise proceed to
get the parser error.

gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

PR c++/96137
* parser.c (cp_parser_class_name): If parser->scope is
error_mark_node, return it, otherwise continue.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR c++/96137
* g++.dg/parse/error63.C: New test.

[Bug bootstrap/98860] [11 Regression] boostrap failure on MinGW-w64 windows 10

2021-01-28 Thread lh_mouse at 126 dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860

Liu Hao  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|lh_mouse at 126 dot com|

--- Comment #20 from Liu Hao  ---
0. You may ask about this issue on MSYS2 issue tracker [1].
1. Talk to the community (the 'people'), not an individual person.
2. Stop being noisy.


[1] https://github.com/msys2/MINGW-packages/issues

[Bug debug/98875] New: DWARF5 as default causes perf probe to hang

2021-01-28 Thread pc at us dot ibm.com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98875

Bug ID: 98875
   Summary: DWARF5 as default causes perf probe to hang
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: debug
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: pc at us dot ibm.com
  Target Milestone: ---

I sent this to gcc-patches, but realized I should open a bug report:
--
The subject commit, 3804e937b0e252a7e42632fe6d9f898f1851a49c, causes a
failure in the test suite for the IBM Advance Toolchain.  The test in
question uses "perf probe" to set a tracepoint at "main" in a newly built
(with GCC 11) binary of "/bin/ld".  With the patch applied, the command
enters an infinte loop, calling libdw1 functions but making no progress.

The infinite loop can be found in the Linux kernel
tools/perf/utils/probe-finder.c:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c?h=v5.11-rc5#n1190

Reverting this patch permits the command to succeed.
--
$ grep VERSION= /etc/os-release
VERSION="15-SP2"
$ uname -r
5.3.18-22-default
$ perf --version
perf version 5.3.18

Top of the GCC tree used: ATSRC_PACKAGE_REV=eb9883c1312c

Reversion patch:
--
$ cat ~/projects/gcc/gcc/gcc-revert-dwarf-5.patch 
diff --git a/gcc/common.opt b/gcc/common.opt
index a8a2b67a99d..7aff4ac6079 100644
--- a/gcc/common.opt
+++ b/gcc/common.opt
@@ -3179,7 +3179,7 @@ Common Driver JoinedOrMissing Negative(gdwarf-)
 Generate debug information in default version of DWARF format.

 gdwarf-
-Common Driver Joined UInteger Var(dwarf_version) Init(5) Negative(gstabs)
+Common Driver Joined UInteger Var(dwarf_version) Init(4) Negative(gstabs)
 Generate debug information in DWARF v2 (or later) format.

 gdwarf32
--

Failing command:
$ perf probe -v -x /path/to/AT/at-next-15.0-0-alpha/bin/ld ldmain=main

[Bug target/79251] PowerPC vec_insert generates store-hit-load if the element number is variable

2021-01-28 Thread luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79251

luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on master.

[Bug target/98065] [11 Regression] ICE in rs6000_expand_vector_set, at config/rs6000/rs6000.c:7024 since r11-5457

2021-01-28 Thread luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98065
Bug 98065 depends on bug 98799, which changed state.

Bug 98799 Summary: [11 Regression] vector_set_var ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98799

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug target/98799] [11 Regression] vector_set_var ICE

2021-01-28 Thread luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98799

luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed.

[Bug middle-end/98871] Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site

2021-01-28 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |msebor at gcc dot 
gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor  ---
Until this is fixed, moving the suppression pragma above or around the
definition of the inc() function should work.

[Bug middle-end/98871] Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site

2021-01-28 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Component|c   |middle-end
   Last reconfirmed||2021-01-29
   See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=98465,
   ||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
   ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=98512
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Keywords||diagnostic
 CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Blocks||24639

--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor  ---
Confirmed.  The root cause of the problem is that the #pragma diagnostic
suppression machinery consider only one location but that location may be
different depending on the warning and depending on inlining.  For some
warnings it's the location of the call site into which the problem statement
has been inlined.  For others it might be the original location of the
statement itself.  -Wuninitialized and -Wmaybe-uninitialized happen to fall
into the first category.

The solution I posted for pr98465 and pr98512 lets it consider both (or all
locations along the inlining stack) and, with an minor extension, makes the
suppression work in this case as well.


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
[Bug 24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

[Bug c++/81930] [meta-bug] Issues with -Weffc++

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81930
Bug 81930 depends on bug 98841, which changed state.

Bug 98841 Summary: wrong ‘operator=’ should return a reference to ‘*this’ 
[-Weffc++]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98841

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

[Bug c++/98841] wrong ‘operator=’ should return a reference to ‘*this’ [-Weffc++]

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98841

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Fixed for GCC 11.

[Bug c++/98841] wrong ‘operator=’ should return a reference to ‘*this’ [-Weffc++]

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98841

--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:850a8ec54c4310d779004299bf9a0dec52324e9e

commit r11-6964-g850a8ec54c4310d779004299bf9a0dec52324e9e
Author: Jakub Jelinek 
Date:   Fri Jan 29 00:39:00 2021 +0100

c++: Fix -Weffc++ in templates [PR98841]

We emit a bogus warning on the following testcase, suggesting that the
operator should return *this even when it does that already.
The problem is that normally cp_build_indirect_ref_1 ensures that *this
is folded as current_class_ref, but in templates (if return type is
non-dependent, otherwise check_return_expr doesn't check it) it didn't
go through cp_build_indirect_ref_1, but just built another INDIRECT_REF.
Which means it then doesn't compare pointer-equal to current_class_ref.

The following patch fixes it by doing in build_x_indirect_ref for
*this what cp_build_indirect_ref_1 would do.

2021-01-28  Jakub Jelinek  

PR c++/98841
* typeck.c (build_x_indirect_ref): For *this, return
current_class_ref.

* g++.dg/warn/effc5.C: New test.

[Bug middle-end/98503] [11 regression] -Warray-bounds false positive with global variables at -O2 since r11-3306-g3f9a497d1b0dd9da

2021-01-28 Thread msebor at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98503

Martin Sebor  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||patch
  Component|c   |middle-end
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |msebor at gcc dot 
gnu.org
 Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED

--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor  ---
Patch to issue -Wstrict-aliasing instead of -Warray-bounds in the subset of
cases when the member access is fully in bounds but the enclosing struct is
not:
  https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564483.html

[Bug testsuite/98874] New: PowerPC test gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90 uses wrong dg-options

2021-01-28 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98874

Bug ID: 98874
   Summary: PowerPC test
gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90 uses
wrong dg-options
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: testsuite
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

In looking at PR target/98870, I noticed that there is a failure of another
module (gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90) because it uses obsolete
options:

Executing on host: /home3/meissner/fsf-build-ppc64le/work034-if/gcc/xgcc
-B/home3/meissner/fsf-build-ppc64le/work034-if/gcc/
/home/meissner/fsf-src/work034/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90
   -fdiagnostics-plain-output-O  -mdejagnu-cpu=405 -mpower9-minmax
-mfloat128-type -S -o pr80108-1.s(timeout = 300)
spawn -ignore SIGHUP /home3/meissner/fsf-build-ppc64le/work034-if/gcc/xgcc
-B/home3/meissner/fsf-build-ppc64le/work034-if/gcc/
/home/meissner/fsf-src/work034/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90
-fdiagnostics-plain-output -O -mdejagnu-cpu=405 -mpower9-minmax -mfloat128-type
-S -o pr80108-1.s
xgcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-mfloat128-type'; did you mean
'-mfloat128'?
compiler exited with status 1
XFAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/pr80108-1.f90   -O  (test for excess
errors)
Excess errors:
xgcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-mfloat128-type'; did you mean
'-mfloat128'?

[Bug target/98870] [11 regression] assembler output count off for gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 after r11-6959

2021-01-28 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98870

--- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner  ---
*** Bug 98873 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/98873] PowerPC test gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 now fails

2021-01-28 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98873

Peter Bergner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Peter Bergner  ---
Closing as a dup.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 98870 ***

[Bug target/98873] PowerPC test gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 now fails

2021-01-28 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98873

Michael Meissner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||powerpc64le-gnu-linux
  Build||powerpc64le-gnu-linux
   Host||powerpc64le-gnu-linux
   Last reconfirmed||2021-01-28
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
 CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
   ||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
   ||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
   ||segher at gcc dot gnu.org,
   ||seurer at us dot ibm.com,
   ||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |meissner at gcc dot 
gnu.org

[Bug target/98872] ICE leads to SEGV on MMA test case

2021-01-28 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98872

Peter Bergner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |bergner at gcc dot 
gnu.org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 CC||raji at linux dot vnet.ibm.com,
   ||segher at gcc dot gnu.org,
   ||wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
 Target||powerpc*-*-*
   Target Milestone|--- |11.0
   Last reconfirmed||2021-01-28
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from Peter Bergner  ---
Raji reported the above ICE/SEGV.  This probably also affects GCC10.

Mine.

[Bug target/98873] New: PowerPC test gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 now fails

2021-01-28 Thread meissner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98873

Bug ID: 98873
   Summary: PowerPC test
gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 now
fails
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

In checking in the change on January 28th that changes the built-in function
names if long double is IEEE 128-bit, I broke the test
gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90.

This is before the change the compiler had changed 'logl' to 'logf128' when
long doubles are IEEE 128-bit.  After the change, 'logl' becomes '__logieee128'
instead.

[Bug target/98872] New: ICE leads to SEGV on MMA test case

2021-01-28 Thread bergner at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98872

Bug ID: 98872
   Summary: ICE leads to SEGV on MMA test case
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

bergner@pike:~/gcc/BUGS/MMA$ cat ice3.i 
typedef unsigned char vec_t __attribute__((vector_size(16)));
int
foo (vec_t *rowA, vec_t *rowB, vec_t *dst)
{
  __vector_quad acc0;
  __builtin_mma_xvf32gerpp (&acc0, rowB[0], rowA[0]);
  __builtin_mma_disassemble_acc (dst, &acc0);
}

bergner@pike:~/gcc/BUGS/MMA$
/home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-mainline-mma-builtins-debug/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-mainline-mma-builtins-debug/gcc -S -O2
-mcpu=power10 ice3.i 
during RTL pass: init-regs
ice3.i: In function ‘foo’:
ice3.i:8:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
8 | }
  | ^
0x113d6697 crash_signal
/home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-mma-builtins/gcc/toplev.c:327
0x10b436c4 emit_move_insn(rtx_def*, rtx_def*)
/home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-mma-builtins/gcc/expr.c:3821
0x1289319b initialize_uninitialized_regs
/home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-mma-builtins/gcc/init-regs.c:108
0x12893443 execute
/home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-mma-builtins/gcc/init-regs.c:156

[Bug c++/96137] [11 Regression] GCC hang on in invalid function definition

2021-01-28 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96137

--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek  ---
A more realistic test:

void
fn ()
{
  X.operator T();
}

[Bug c/98871] Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site

2021-01-28 Thread 1zeeky at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871

1zeeky at gmail dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Attachment #50077|0   |1
is obsolete||

--- Comment #1 from 1zeeky at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 50078
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50078&action=edit
actual testcast

I played around with the code before posting the patch. This is the actual
version I meant to send.

[Bug c/98871] New: Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration site

2021-01-28 Thread 1zeeky at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98871

Bug ID: 98871
   Summary: Cannot silence -Wmaybe-uninitialized at declaration
site
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: 1zeeky at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 50077
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50077&action=edit
testcase

I have some code where I'm relying on the caller to uphold some guarantee in
order to properly initialize a variable.
gcc correctly detects that the variable maybe left uninitialized. The warning
is correct, but I am unable to properly silence this warning because the
warning doesn't "show up" at the location where the variable is declared, but
where it is used, which is another function, which receives it via pointer.

This is probably better explained with the testcase. The setup is a bit weird
and looks like it could be minimized. I needed to increase the complexity to
thwart static analysis sufficiently such that gcc is unsure if 'max' gets
initialized or not.
Here's the warning I get:

$ gcc -O -Wmaybe-uninitialized maybe-uninit.c
maybe-uninit.c: In function ‘main’:
maybe-uninit.c:8:9: warning: ‘max.x’ may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
8 |  return ++*x;
  | ^~~~
maybe-uninit.c:15:13: note: ‘max.x’ was declared here
   15 |  struct Foo max;
  | ^~~

A site-note: the first line in the error-report states "In function ‘main’" for
some reason.

I would like to silence the warning from within foo() (my failed attempt at
using '#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wmaybe-uninitialized"' is left in the
testcase), since inc() is used in other places where having this warning may be
beneficial.
The warning would probably have to change to something like

maybe-uninit.c: In function ‘foo’:
maybe-uninit.c:22:13: warning: 'max.x' is passed to function 'inc', where it
may be used uninitialized [-Wmaybe-pass-uninitialized]
   22 |  return inc(&max.x);
  | ^~
maybe-uninit.c:8:9: note: ‘max.x’ used here
8 |  return ++*x;
  | ^~~~
maybe-uninit.c:15:13: note: ‘max.x’ was declared here
   15 |  struct Foo max;

Alternatively, a variable attribute would work for me as well, e.g.
'__attribute__((assume_initialized))'.

Locally I use gcc 10.2.0, but through godbolt.org I also tested 10.2.1 and "gcc
(trunk)" which describes itself as "gcc (Compiler-Explorer-Build) 11.0.0
20210127 (experimental)".

[Bug tree-optimization/98866] [11 Regresion] Compile time hog in VRP since r11-3685-gfcae5121154d1c33

2021-01-28 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98866

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Macleod  ---
Very large function (16000+ basic blocks) with a lot of exception regions, and
a pattern whereby about 300 pointers are live to all the regions. We spend a
lot of time propagating an unchanging non-zero property around. 

My observation is that if a pointer evaluates to [1, +INF] at its definition
(ie, the address of something), there will never be a meaningful range to
track.

a comparison to NULL will be folded as appropriate, and there is no need to
track [UNDEFINED] on the un-taken edge as the branch will be folded and the
edge removed.  The range will remain [1, +INF] on the other edge.

a comparison to some other pointer will likewise not result in a  change of the
range [1, +INF].  Relational/symbolic tracking could decide to fold the
comparison away or propagate the ssa_name, but again, it will not change the
range from [1, +INF]

I think I can extend the invariant tweak to the cache to also include pointers
which evaluate to [1, +INF] at their definition to be "invariant" as well and
thus not be included in the on-entry cache.

This appears to resolve the time issue.  testing is underway

[Bug bootstrap/98338] [11 Regression] profiledbootstrap failure on x86_64-linux

2021-01-28 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338

--- Comment #12 from Jan Hubicka  ---
> > Honza, any ideas on this?
> The comment on assert says
>  /* In LTO mode we may have speculative edges set.  */
>  gcc_assert (in_lto_p || size_info->size == size_info->self_size);
>  
> Which seems expected because the speculative edges are not accounted by
> self_size. So perhaps we simply want to track if there is speculative
> edge and disable the sanity check inthat case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg01650.html
is the patch that intoduced the comment and it seems it does right
thing.  size_inf->self_size is normally computed from original function
body and if speculation is added it is not udpated, while
size_info->size contains size adjusted by all speculations and inline
decision, so in presence of speculatie edges we can not expect both to
match.

I will check tomorrow if it makes code to compile.

Honza
> 
> Honza

[Bug bootstrap/98338] [11 Regression] profiledbootstrap failure on x86_64-linux

2021-01-28 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98338

--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka  ---
> Honza, any ideas on this?
The comment on assert says
 /* In LTO mode we may have speculative edges set.  */
 gcc_assert (in_lto_p || size_info->size == size_info->self_size); 
Which seems expected because the speculative edges are not accounted by
self_size. So perhaps we simply want to track if there is speculative
edge and disable the sanity check inthat case.

Honza

[Bug c++/94775] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in strip_typedefs, at cp/tree.c:1734 since r8-4668-g8a5ee94a082b3d48

2021-01-28 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94775

Marek Polacek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE  |[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in
   |in strip_typedefs, at   |strip_typedefs, at
   |cp/tree.c:1734 since|cp/tree.c:1734 since
   |r8-4668-g8a5ee94a082b3d48   |r8-4668-g8a5ee94a082b3d48

--- Comment #19 from Marek Polacek  ---
Fixed on trunk.  Not sure if I want to backport to 10...

[Bug c++/94775] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in strip_typedefs, at cp/tree.c:1734 since r8-4668-g8a5ee94a082b3d48

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94775

--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:513ee7d2cd9a60339a50dc9c4cba39a8f1c707f0

commit r11-6963-g513ee7d2cd9a60339a50dc9c4cba39a8f1c707f0
Author: Marek Polacek 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 16:21:50 2021 -0500

tree: Don't reuse types if TYPE_USER_ALIGN differ [PR94775]

A year ago I submitted this patch:

~~
Here we trip on the TYPE_USER_ALIGN (t) assert in strip_typedefs: it
gets "const d[0]" with TYPE_USER_ALIGN=0 but the result built by
build_cplus_array_type is "const char[0]" with TYPE_USER_ALIGN=1.

When we strip_typedefs the element of the array "const d", we see it's
a typedef_variant_p, so we look at its DECL_ORIGINAL_TYPE, which is
char, but we need to add the const qualifier, so we call
cp_build_qualified_type -> build_qualified_type
where get_qualified_type checks to see if we already have such a type
by walking the variants list, which in this case is:

  char -> c -> const char -> const char -> d -> const d

Because check_base_type only checks TYPE_ALIGN and not TYPE_USER_ALIGN,
we choose the first const char, which has TYPE_USER_ALIGN set.  If the
element type of an array has TYPE_USER_ALIGN, the array type gets it too.

So we can make check_base_type stricter.  I was afraid that it might make
us reuse types less often, but measuring showed that we build the same
amount of types with and without the patch, while bootstrapping.
~~

However, the patch broke a few tests on STRICT_ALIGNMENT platforms and
had to be reverted.  This is another try.  The original patch is kept
unchanged, but I added the finalize_type_size hunk that ought to fix the
STRICT_ALIGNMENT issues.

The problem is that finalize_type_size can clear TYPE_USER_ALIGN on the
main variant of a type, but doesn't clear it on any of the variants.
Then we end up with types which share the same TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT, but
their TYPE_CANONICAL differs and then the usual "canonical types differ
for identical types" follows.

I've created alignas19.C to exercise this scenario.  What happens is:
- when parsing the class S we create a type S in xref_tag,
- we see alignas(8) so common_handle_aligned_attribute sets T_U_A in S,
- we parse the member function fn and build_memfn_type creates a copy
  of S to add const; this variant has T_U_A set,
- we finish_struct S which calls layout_class_type -> finish_record_type
  -> finalize_size_type where we reset T_U_A in S (but const S keeps it),
- finish_non_static_data_member for arr calls maybe_dummy_object with
  type = S,
- maybe_dummy_object calls same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p
  to check if S and TREE_TYPE (current_class_ref), which is const S,
  are the same,
- same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p creates cv-unqualified
  versions of the passed types.  Previously we'd use our main variant
  S when stripping "const S" of const, but since the T_U_A flags don't
  match (check_base_type), we create a new variant S'.  Then we crash in
  comptypes because S and S' have the same TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT but
  different TYPE_CANONICALs.

With my patch we'll clear T_U_A for S's variants too, and then instead
of S' we'll just use S.

gcc/ChangeLog:

PR c++/94775
* stor-layout.c (finalize_type_size): If we reset TYPE_USER_ALIGN
in
the main variant, maybe reset it in its variants too.
* tree.c (check_base_type): Return true only if TYPE_USER_ALIGN
match.
(check_aligned_type): Check if TYPE_USER_ALIGN match.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR c++/94775
* g++.dg/cpp0x/alignas19.C: New test.
* g++.dg/warn/Warray-bounds15.C: New test.

[Bug c++/58354] variadic template ambiguous

2021-01-28 Thread 1zeeky at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58354

--- Comment #2 from 1zeeky at gmail dot com ---
This has been fixed as of gcc 10.2.

[Bug fortran/86470] [8/9/10/11 Regression] [OOP] ICE with OMP

2021-01-28 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86470

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #13 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on all open branches.  Closing.

Thanks for the report!

[Bug fortran/86470] [8/9/10/11 Regression] [OOP] ICE with OMP

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86470

--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits  ---
The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd1537924e18e87a44abbd4063de89f7b48c60d5

commit r8-10744-gdd1537924e18e87a44abbd4063de89f7b48c60d5
Author: Harald Anlauf 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 10:13:46 2021 +0100

PR fortran/86470 - ICE with OpenMP, class(*) allocatable

gfc_call_malloc should malloc an area of size 1 if no size given.

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/86470
* trans.c (gfc_call_malloc): Allocate area of size 1 if passed
size is NULL (as documented).

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/86470
* gfortran.dg/gomp/pr86470.f90: New test.

(cherry picked from commit 33a7a93218b1393d0135e3c4a9ad9ced87808f5e)

[Bug fortran/86470] [8/9/10/11 Regression] [OOP] ICE with OMP

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86470

--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits  ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2d9597f400e3456240e4499c9a9bc7023380247f

commit r9-9209-g2d9597f400e3456240e4499c9a9bc7023380247f
Author: Harald Anlauf 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 10:13:46 2021 +0100

PR fortran/86470 - ICE with OpenMP, class(*) allocatable

gfc_call_malloc should malloc an area of size 1 if no size given.

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/86470
* trans.c (gfc_call_malloc): Allocate area of size 1 if passed
size is NULL (as documented).

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/86470
* gfortran.dg/gomp/pr86470.f90: New test.

(cherry picked from commit 33a7a93218b1393d0135e3c4a9ad9ced87808f5e)

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed||2021-01-28
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |redi at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/86470] [8/9/10/11 Regression] [OOP] ICE with OMP

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86470

--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits  ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f42bb8722204fb83dcd001cc4254ad25b969402

commit r10-9308-g0f42bb8722204fb83dcd001cc4254ad25b969402
Author: Harald Anlauf 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 10:13:46 2021 +0100

PR fortran/86470 - ICE with OpenMP, class(*) allocatable

gfc_call_malloc should malloc an area of size 1 if no size given.

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/86470
* trans.c (gfc_call_malloc): Allocate area of size 1 if passed
size is NULL (as documented).

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/86470
* gfortran.dg/gomp/pr86470.f90: New test.

(cherry picked from commit 33a7a93218b1393d0135e3c4a9ad9ced87808f5e)

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #30 from cqwrteur  ---
> Great. So build with --disable-libstdcxx-verbose as well and stop
> complaining about a feature that other people find useful.

But even GCC bootstraps itself with EH, RTTI disabled (of course you are not
allowed to use iostream either). How could you convince other people they are
actually useful?

They are broken tbh.

[Bug target/82150] Produces a branch prefetch which causes a hang

2021-01-28 Thread david.welch at netronome dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82150

david.welch at netronome dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
 Resolution|INVALID |---

--- Comment #15 from david.welch at netronome dot com ---
Please read the errata and not blow off this ticket.

The MMU is not being used, this is a verified problem, acknowledge by ARM as
well as being independently discovered.  The problem has been present and known
by ARM for years, as well as being reported a while ago to gnu/gcc.

Use the mmu is not a valid solution to fix a known, demonstrable, bug in the
compiler.

[Bug target/98870] [11 regression] assembler output count off for gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 after r11-6959

2021-01-28 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98870

seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
 Target||powerpc64*-linux-gnu
  Build||powerpc64*-linux-gnu
   Host||powerpc64*-linux-gnu

--- Comment #1 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---


commit e11e5d3889f9e54c547efee50fa1b72b50f0f265
Author: Michael Meissner 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 11:30:46 2021 -0500

[Bug target/98870] New: [11 regression] assembler output count off for gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 after r11-6959

2021-01-28 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98870

Bug ID: 98870
   Summary: [11 regression] assembler output count off for
gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90 after
r11-6959
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: target
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

g:e11e5d3889f9e54c547efee50fa1b72b50f0f265, r11-6959

FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fortran/ieee128-math.f90   -O   scan-assembler
\\mbl logf128\\M

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #29 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #23)
> And memcpy must be provided as documented in the GCC documentation:
> Most of the compiler support routines used by GCC are present in
> @file{libgcc}, but there are a few exceptions.  GCC requires the
> freestanding environment provide @code{memcpy}, @code{memmove},
> @code{memset} and @code{memcmp}.
> Finally, if @code{__builtin_trap} is used, and the target does
> not implement the @code{trap} pattern, then GCC emits a call
> to @code{abort}.

I am sure I did not understand anything wrong. The rule is simple, if you use
gcc, you must use libgcc. libgcc provides those facilities.

https://wiki.osdev.org/Libgcc

__builtin_trap() is always faster than std::terminate(), even it actually emits
a call to std::abort(), because std::terminate() requires atomic to sync the
terminate_handler. The problem with std::terminate() is that it does not work
like operator new where it is weak alias. You still get bloat and dependency to
std::abort() even you are using set_terminate_handle().

if we are using __builtin_trap() on platforms like x86_64, they emit ud
instructions and use that to terminate is fast and avoid dependency on libc,
(particularly we mean glibc here.)

[Bug fortran/83927] Type-Bound Procedure on element of Derived Type PARAMETER Array

2021-01-28 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83927

--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres  ---
> Seems fixed... I'll try to commit the test case this evening.

I still get

   31 |   M = v_array_par(1)%MyFunc()
  |  1
Error: Cannot convert TYPE(mytype) to REAL(4) at (1)

with

module Types

  implicit none

  type MyType
real :: x
  contains
procedure :: MyFunc
  end type

contains

  pure function MyFunc(this) result(M)
class(MyType), intent(in) :: this
real  :: M

M = this%x
  end function
end module

program Main
  use Types

  implicit none

  type(MyType), parameter :: v_array_par(1) = [ MyType(1) ]
  type(MyType), parameter :: v_scalar_par = MyType(1)
  type(MyType) :: v_array(1)
  real :: M

  M = v_array_par(1)%MyFunc()
  print *, M

!  M = v_scalar_par%MyFunc()
!  print *, M

  v_array(1) = MyType(1)
  M = v_array(1)%MyFunc()
  print *, M

end program

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Actually asm (".global pthread_cond_init"); (etc.) is probably better, doesn't
need relocations, just adds the symbol to the symtab as non-weak.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Unaware of extern directive in gas.
I'd think (but it would need to be surrounded by configury checks) that
something like:
.section .gnu.need.pthread_cond, "e"
.8byte pthread_cond_init
...
.previous
where you'd list all the symbols you want to force in should work though, and
wouldn't actually waste .data or .rodata.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
In that case it finds the no-op symbol in libc.so.6 and doesn't crash.

$ g++ cv.C   -g -Wl,--trace-symbol=pthread_cond_destroy 
/usr/bin/ld: /lib64/libc.so.6: definition of pthread_cond_destroy


This fixes the static linking case:

--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/condition_variable.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/condition_variable.cc
@@ -31,9 +31,19 @@ namespace std _GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY(default)
 {
 _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION

-  condition_variable::condition_variable() noexcept = default;
+  condition_variable::condition_variable() noexcept
+  {
+#if defined __GLIBC__ && ! defined _GLIBCXX_SHARED
+asm("extern pthread_cond_init");
+#endif
+  }

-  condition_variable::~condition_variable() noexcept = default;
+  condition_variable::~condition_variable() noexcept
+  {
+#if defined __GLIBC__ && ! defined _GLIBCXX_SHARED
+asm("extern pthread_cond_destroy");
+#endif
+  }

   void
   condition_variable::wait(unique_lock& __lock) noexcept

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #28 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #27)
> > But portable code can't rely on deterministict exceptions either, yet you
> > insist that it's essential and you can't live without it. It seems you're
> > quite happy to rely on non-standard things when it suits you, but when it
> > doesn't it's completely unusable. Because you're a timewaster.
> 
> It will be portable when it is a part of the C++ standard.
> 
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #25)
> > > I mean you can try to fix it a little. However, it breaks ABI.
> > 
> > So do deterministic exceptions.
> 
> It does not. No existing code will be broken because of deterministic
> exceptions.
>  
> > Please go away and write your own compiler or language.
> 
> Rust folks did that. Are you happy with it?
> 
> I have no interest in writing my own compiler or language. I am more
> interested in how to fixing existing things. I was a lover of C++ EH and I
> completely hate C++ exceptions when I understand the ugliness beneath it.
> That is why deterministic exceptions are important.
> 
> Same with C++ iostream, they need to be replaced with something else too.

That is why Herb Sutter said "digging the hole we already jumped into". Those
fixing makes nonsense, to be honest.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #21 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
So how does that work for dynamic linking when -lpthread is not linked in?
Does it crash too?

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #27 from cqwrteur  ---
> But portable code can't rely on deterministict exceptions either, yet you
> insist that it's essential and you can't live without it. It seems you're
> quite happy to rely on non-standard things when it suits you, but when it
> doesn't it's completely unusable. Because you're a timewaster.

It will be portable when it is a part of the C++ standard.

> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #25)
> > I mean you can try to fix it a little. However, it breaks ABI.
> 
> So do deterministic exceptions.

It does not. No existing code will be broken because of deterministic
exceptions.

> Please go away and write your own compiler or language.

Rust folks did that. Are you happy with it?

I have no interest in writing my own compiler or language. I am more interested
in how to fixing existing things. I was a lover of C++ EH and I completely hate
C++ exceptions when I understand the ugliness beneath it. That is why
deterministic exceptions are important.

Same with C++ iostream, they need to be replaced with something else too.

[Bug target/82150] Produces a branch prefetch which causes a hang

2021-01-28 Thread rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82150

Richard Earnshaw  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |INVALID
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

--- Comment #14 from Richard Earnshaw  ---
The code generated is architecturally correct.  If your core is prefetching
from addresses that are not valid then this is indicative that the MMU is
incorrectly configured for your system.  Prefetches will NOT be attempted from
unmapped pages, or pages that are mapped as device memory.

So you need to find out why your memory system has not been correctly set up.

There's no bug in GCC here.

[Bug target/98862] Complex reduction support in offload region

2021-01-28 Thread xw111luoye at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98862

--- Comment #3 from Ye Luo  ---
Cool. -foffload=-latomic resolved my problem.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #20 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
I don't think so. The linker just doesn't resolve the undefined weak symbol for
pthread_cond_destroy is left equal to zero, and so there's a segfault when it
gets called.

$ g++ cv.C -static -g -Wl,--trace-symbol=pthread_cond_destroy -pthread
/usr/bin/ld:
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/10/libstdc++.a(condition_variable.o):
reference to pthread_cond_destroy


IIUC it's not finding the definition in libc.a, or any definition at all.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #26 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #24)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #22)
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #20)
> > > 1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do
> > > not have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward.
> > > You do not have std::addressof().
> > 
> > Freestanding libstdc++ provides std::move, std::forward and std::addressof.
> 
> But that is actually not standard compliant.

I think what you mean is it's not portable and strictly compliant code can't
rely on it.

It's is standard compliant for our freestanding mode to provide more than the
minimum required.

But portable code can't rely on deterministict exceptions either, yet you
insist that it's essential and you can't live without it. It seems you're quite
happy to rely on non-standard things when it suits you, but when it doesn't
it's completely unusable. Because you're a timewaster.

(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #25)
> I mean you can try to fix it a little. However, it breaks ABI.

So do deterministic exceptions.

Please go away and write your own compiler or language.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #25 from cqwrteur  ---
> > 1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do
> > not have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward.
> > You do not have std::addressof(). you do not have std::array.) However, you
> > have an exception handling support.
> 
> But no dependency on stdio.

That does not mean it has no dependency. It depends on malloc/free which is
something you cannot avoid at all.

BTW, there are other issues with the implementation EH unwinder, it walks stack
twice for just more debugging information. Guess what is the information
consumed for? They output to stdio lol.

Your termination with multiple fputs calls also has issues even in a hosted
environment. Because it is not process-safe. When multiple processes throw eh
at the same time, they end up corrupting log files. (I did see that when i was
doing testing on the burden of multiple process TCP servers.) I guess changing
that to writev(2) might solve part of the problems but writev(2) does not
guarantee process safety for console or other I/O devices.
> 
> > 2. What's the point of reporting a bug when building libstdc++ with GNU
> 
> So it can be fixed, duh.
> 
> > newlib just works much better and you have an entire hosted toolchain that
> > will not break compilation? The only problem is that you never enable EH.
> > I did report bugs before. However, it was not fixed. I am not going to try
> > it again tbh since newlib works just fine.
> 
> Great. So build with --disable-libstdcxx-verbose as well and stop
> complaining about a feature that other people find useful.
> 
> Maybe we should make that the default for --with-newlib builds. That might
> be a useful improvement. More useful than your usual hyperbole and
> timewasting anyway.

I mean you can try to fix it a little. However, it breaks ABI. The effort does
not worth the cost.

More fundamental issues like binary bloat would never get fixed. Unfortunately,
the C++ compiler does not remove dead virtual functions. The entire C++
exceptions are built on virtual function calls. That stuff all add bloat you do
not want. Recently I just remove one virtual method of EH and the binary size
reduces 50KB for hello world.

If the exceptions are just designed for termination, it is nowhere better than
killing the process and restarted it again. (With __builtin_trap() you even get
higher performance than EH in the happy path because it reduces the burden of
CPU instruction cache)

For servers hosted on the internet, using EH is a disaster since it is
basically DDOS. The attacker can inject invalid input to make the process keep
throwing EH which ends up crashing. (There are security papers talking about
that. I can even show you). EH does not work for cryptography either since
cryptography requires deterministic. Any gap between timing can be a
side-channel.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #24 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #22)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #20)
> > 1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do
> > not have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward.
> > You do not have std::addressof().
> 
> Freestanding libstdc++ provides std::move, std::forward and std::addressof.

But that is actually not standard compliant. You may end up with another
toolchain that does not provide those facilities and you have troubles now.

The only option is to use newlib basically and that is why newlib is nowadays
the standard libc for embedded systems.

[Bug target/97701] [10/11 Regression] aarch64: ICE in extract_constrain_insn since r10-4447-g095f78c6

2021-01-28 Thread vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97701

--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov  ---
I've reproduced it on gcc-10 branch.

For some reason, LRA does not change register class for reload pseudo.

This bug will take some time for a fix as the fix will probably affect very
sensitive part of LRA and will need a lot of testing.  But I guess the patch
will be ready on the next week.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
And memcpy must be provided as documented in the GCC documentation:
Most of the compiler support routines used by GCC are present in
@file{libgcc}, but there are a few exceptions.  GCC requires the
freestanding environment provide @code{memcpy}, @code{memmove},
@code{memset} and @code{memcmp}.
Finally, if @code{__builtin_trap} is used, and the target does
not implement the @code{trap} pattern, then GCC emits a call
to @code{abort}.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #20)
> 1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do
> not have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward.
> You do not have std::addressof().

Freestanding libstdc++ provides std::move, std::forward and std::addressof.

[Bug c++/98869] Allowing mapping this in OpenMP target

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98869

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
It is required by OpenMP 4.5, and the OpenMP 5.0 support that allows this is
not finished yet.

[Bug c++/98869] Allowing mapping this in OpenMP target

2021-01-28 Thread xw111luoye at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98869

--- Comment #1 from Ye Luo  ---
Full source code at
https://github.com/QMCPACK/qmcpack/blob/a23584738485bb7c948d0ba1841c669fe76500b6/src/Particle/SoaDistanceTableABOMPTarget.h#L63

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #16)
> > > That does not work in the real-world since your libstdc++'s freestanding
> > > header never works correctly, (you get compilation errors).
> > 
> > Try reporting a bug about *that* next time (except don't, I don't want any
> > more stupidity from you).
> 
> Let me be more clear.


That would be a welcome change from your usual nonsense.

> 1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do
> not have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward.
> You do not have std::addressof(). you do not have std::array.) However, you
> have an exception handling support.

But no dependency on stdio.


> 2. What's the point of reporting a bug when building libstdc++ with GNU

So it can be fixed, duh.

> newlib just works much better and you have an entire hosted toolchain that
> will not break compilation? The only problem is that you never enable EH.
> I did report bugs before. However, it was not fixed. I am not going to try
> it again tbh since newlib works just fine.

Great. So build with --disable-libstdcxx-verbose as well and stop complaining
about a feature that other people find useful.

Maybe we should make that the default for --with-newlib builds. That might be a
useful improvement. More useful than your usual hyperbole and timewasting
anyway.

[Bug c++/98869] New: Allowing mapping this in OpenMP target

2021-01-28 Thread xw111luoye at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98869

Bug ID: 98869
   Summary: Allowing mapping this in OpenMP target
   Product: gcc
   Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
  Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
  Reporter: xw111luoye at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

this restriction seems unnecessary.

/home/yeluo/opt/qmcpack/src/Particle/SoaDistanceTableABOMPTarget.h:63:42:
error: ‘this’ allowed in OpenMP only in ‘declare simd’ clauses
   63 | #pragma omp target enter data map(to:this[:1])

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Is that because some functions are also in libc.a and not just in libpthread.a?

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #20 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #16)
> > That does not work in the real-world since your libstdc++'s freestanding
> > header never works correctly, (you get compilation errors).
> 
> Try reporting a bug about *that* next time (except don't, I don't want any
> more stupidity from you).

Let me be more clear.

1. Freestanding C++ in the current situation is very problematic. (You do not
have memcpy, you do not have std::move. You do not have std::forward. You do
not have std::addressof(). you do not have std::array.) However, you have an
exception handling support.

2. What's the point of reporting a bug when building libstdc++ with GNU newlib
just works much better and you have an entire hosted toolchain that will not
break compilation? The only problem is that you never enable EH.
I did report bugs before. However, it was not fixed. I am not going to try it
again tbh since newlib works just fine.

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2018/p1105r0.html
Bare metal gcc 4.8 with newlib
undefined reference to "__exidx_end"
undefined reference to "__exidx_start"
undefined reference to "_exit"
undefined reference to "_sbrk"
undefined reference to "_kill"
undefined reference to "_getpid"
undefined reference to "_write"
undefined reference to "_close"
undefined reference to "_fstat"
undefined reference to "_isatty"
undefined reference to "_lseek"
undefined reference to "_read"

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #17)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> The example in comment 0 fails on Fedora. Nothing in libstdc++.a causes
> anything from libpthread.o to be used.

However, any real program that uses std::condition_variable is likely to also
use std::thread, and that will cause a dependency on symbols in libpthread.o

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #16)
> That does not work in the real-world since your libstdc++'s freestanding
> header never works correctly, (you get compilation errors).

Try reporting a bug about *that* next time (except don't, I don't want any more
stupidity from you).

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |INVALID
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED

--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #17)
> No one wants to tweak around compiler options since compiler options can
> always break something tbh.

OK, go away and stop wasting our time then.

Write your own compiler or your own language and stop being a pain here.

[Bug middle-end/98209] [8/9/10/11 Regression] printf failed with O1 or above

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98209

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
But e.g. for the *intrin.h intrinsics, ignoring the ISA requirements that it
got from the target pragmas is highly undesirable, we do need the diagnostics
and refuse to inline them, otherwise they will ICE all over.
And it is unclear how to differentiate between ISA requirements that were added
because of the command line option flags vs. ISA requirements that got added
through target pragmas or target attributes.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> Are those weak refs from libstdc++.a objects or from the user *.o files?

>From libstdc++.a

> If the former, perhaps we could declare some libstdc++ APIs (related to
> threading) as requiring linking of -lpthread and made them non-weak in
> libstdc++.a.

Yes, I think we should just use the non-weak pthread_xxx symbols directly when
!defined(_GLIBCXX_SHARED) and rely on those sections from libstdc++.a not being
used unless they're needed.

> I don't really see how can one reproduce this on Fedora/RHEL/CentOS where
> libpthread.a
> contains a single libpthread.o and therefore it is either you link no thread
> support at all, or link it completely.

The example in comment 0 fails on Fedora. Nothing in libstdc++.a causes
anything from libpthread.o to be used.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #17 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #12)
> > > > stdio.h should not get included in any circumstances for EH. You are
> > > > implementing the operating system, but you need to enable EH by the 
> > > > standard
> > > > and EH relies on stdio. Chicken-egg problem.
> > > 
> > > It doesn't depend on stdio though. What are you talking about?
> > 
> > https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/
> > e11e5d3889f9e54c547efee50fa1b72b50f0f265/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/libsupc%2B%2B/
> > vterminate.cc#L93
> 
> Which is disabled in freestanding, and can be optionally disabled in hosted.
> 
> This is an OPTIONAL feature of libstdc++, not something that exception
> handling intrinsically relies on. If you don't want it, you don't have to
> use it.
> 
> And if you're implementing the OS then you're using freestanding and it's
> automatically disabled. Looks at line 27 in that file.
> 
> Once again you are talking out of your backside.
> 
> Stop wasting our time.

No one wants to tweak around compiler options since compiler options can always
break something tbh.

There is a reason why C++ is terrible in embedded systems and bare-metal
operating systems.

What Linus said was totally correct from a kernel dev perspective.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #16 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #12)
> > > > stdio.h should not get included in any circumstances for EH. You are
> > > > implementing the operating system, but you need to enable EH by the 
> > > > standard
> > > > and EH relies on stdio. Chicken-egg problem.
> > > 
> > > It doesn't depend on stdio though. What are you talking about?
> > 
> > https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/
> > e11e5d3889f9e54c547efee50fa1b72b50f0f265/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/libsupc%2B%2B/
> > vterminate.cc#L93
> 
> Which is disabled in freestanding, and can be optionally disabled in hosted.
> 
> This is an OPTIONAL feature of libstdc++, not something that exception
> handling intrinsically relies on. If you don't want it, you don't have to
> use it.
> 
> And if you're implementing the OS then you're using freestanding and it's
> automatically disabled. Looks at line 27 in that file.
> 
> Once again you are talking out of your backside.
> 
> Stop wasting our time.

That does not work in the real-world since your libstdc++'s freestanding header
never works correctly, (you get compilation errors). In reality, people just
use a "hosted toolchain" with GNU newlib. A "hosted version" of real
freestanding. Or you do not even have proper headers to run C++.

[Bug target/98730] vceqzq_p64 does not generate vceq with immediate 0

2021-01-28 Thread clyon at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98730

Christophe Lyon  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

--- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon  ---
Now fixed on trunk

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
> > (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #12)
> > > stdio.h should not get included in any circumstances for EH. You are
> > > implementing the operating system, but you need to enable EH by the 
> > > standard
> > > and EH relies on stdio. Chicken-egg problem.
> > 
> > It doesn't depend on stdio though. What are you talking about?
> 
> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/
> e11e5d3889f9e54c547efee50fa1b72b50f0f265/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/libsupc%2B%2B/
> vterminate.cc#L93

Which is disabled in freestanding, and can be optionally disabled in hosted.

This is an OPTIONAL feature of libstdc++, not something that exception handling
intrinsically relies on. If you don't want it, you don't have to use it.

And if you're implementing the OS then you're using freestanding and it's
automatically disabled. Looks at line 27 in that file.

Once again you are talking out of your backside.

Stop wasting our time.

[Bug target/98730] vceqzq_p64 does not generate vceq with immediate 0

2021-01-28 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98730

--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31a0ab9213f780d2fa1da6e4879df214c0f247f9

commit r11-6961-g31a0ab9213f780d2fa1da6e4879df214c0f247f9
Author: Christophe Lyon 
Date:   Thu Jan 28 17:55:45 2021 +

arm: Adjust cost of vector of constant zero

Neon vector comparisons have a dedicated version when comparing with
constant zero: it means its cost is free.

Adjust the cost in arm_rtx_costs_internal accordingly, for Neon only,
since MVE does not support this.

2021-01-28  Christophe Lyon  

gcc/
PR target/98730
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_rtx_costs_internal): Adjust cost of vector
of constant zero for comparisons.

gcc/testsuite/
PR target/98730
* gcc.target/arm/simd/vceqzq_p64.c: Update expected result.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Are those weak refs from libstdc++.a objects or from the user *.o files?
If the former, perhaps we could declare some libstdc++ APIs (related to
threading) as requiring linking of -lpthread and made them non-weak in
libstdc++.a.
I don't really see how can one reproduce this on Fedora/RHEL/CentOS where
libpthread.a
contains a single libpthread.o and therefore it is either you link no thread
support at all, or link it completely.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #14 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #13)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #11)
> > Functions without thread-safety are always terrible. Like all functions in
> > cctype. They should be avoided like plague.
> 
> It's thread-safe though. What are you talking about?

It calls std::abort() and std::abort() will close FILE* and FILE* might not be
thread-safe.

BTW std::terminate() is slow compared to compiler intrinsic like
__builtin_trap().

> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #12)
> > stdio.h should not get included in any circumstances for EH. You are
> > implementing the operating system, but you need to enable EH by the standard
> > and EH relies on stdio. Chicken-egg problem.
> 
> It doesn't depend on stdio though. What are you talking about?

https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/e11e5d3889f9e54c547efee50fa1b72b50f0f265/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/libsupc%2B%2B/vterminate.cc#L93

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #11)
> Functions without thread-safety are always terrible. Like all functions in
> cctype. They should be avoided like plague.

It's thread-safe though. What are you talking about?

(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #12)
> stdio.h should not get included in any circumstances for EH. You are
> implementing the operating system, but you need to enable EH by the standard
> and EH relies on stdio. Chicken-egg problem.

It doesn't depend on stdio though. What are you talking about?

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
And the static libc++.a doesn't use weak symbols, so you need to link to
libpthread youself, and the necessary symbols get pulled in correctly.

The problem for libstdc++.a is that the weak symbols do not cause the
libpthread.a symbols to get linked into the binary.

[Bug target/98065] [11 Regression] ICE in rs6000_expand_vector_set, at config/rs6000/rs6000.c:7024 since r11-5457

2021-01-28 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98065

seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #6 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This appears to be fixed from testing with latest trunk.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #12 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #3)
> > Relying on stdio.h even stdio.h is not freestanding.
> 
> Nonsense.

stdio.h should not get included in any circumstances for EH. You are
implementing the operating system, but you need to enable EH by the standard
and EH relies on stdio. Chicken-egg problem.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Maybe libc++ doesn't bother with supporting not linking against -lpthread.

libc++ is linked to libpthread.so unconditionally.

[Bug rtl-optimization/97684] [11 Regression] ICE in reg_preferred_class, at reginfo.c:789 by r11-4577

2021-01-28 Thread seurer at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97684

seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #7 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The two bits of code shown seem to compile fine now on powerpc.  Is this done
then?

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread unlvsur at live dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #11 from cqwrteur  ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #10)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #3)
> > Relying on stdio.h even stdio.h is not freestanding.
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #4)
> > BTW. std::terminate() is not thread-safe which is terrible.
> 
> Nonsense.

Functions without thread-safety are always terrible. Like all functions in
cctype. They should be avoided like plague.

[Bug c++/98861] I want deterministic exceptions (Herbception)

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861

--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #3)
> Relying on stdio.h even stdio.h is not freestanding.

Nonsense.

(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #4)
> BTW. std::terminate() is not thread-safe which is terrible.

Nonsense.

[Bug tree-optimization/98848] [9/10/11 regression] vectorizer failed to reduce max pattern since r9-1590

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98848

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Alternatively, couldn't we support truncation in the reductions if
SSA_NAME_RANGE_INFO suggests that the values are always in the narrower range?

[Bug libstdc++/92546] Large increase in preprocessed file sizes in C++2a mode

2021-01-28 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92546

Jonathan Wakely  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|10.3|12.0
Summary|[10/11 Regression] Large|Large increase in
   |increase in preprocessed|preprocessed file sizes in
   |file sizes in C++2a mode|C++2a mode

--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely  ---
Definitely defer.
I think we could remove the regression marker now too.

[Bug tree-optimization/98848] [9/10/11 regression] vectorizer failed to reduce max pattern since r9-1590

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98848

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|[9/10/11 regression]|[9/10/11 regression]
   |vectorizer failed to reduce |vectorizer failed to reduce
   |max pattern.|max pattern since r9-1590

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Regressed with r9-1590-g370c2ebe8fa20e0812cd2d533d4ed38ee2d37c85

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
Maybe libc++ doesn't bother with supporting not linking against -lpthread.

[Bug libstdc++/58909] C++11's condition variables fail with static linking

2021-01-28 Thread ksaunders at nowsecure dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58909

Keegan Saunders  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ksaunders at nowsecure dot com

--- Comment #12 from Keegan Saunders  ---
This behaviour does not occur with clang when statically linking libc++. It is,
however, still an issue on clang and gcc when using libstdc++.

It is still possible to reproduce this issue with:

clang version 11.0.0 (Fedora 11.0.0-2.fc33)

and

g++ (GCC) 10.2.1 20201125 (Red Hat 10.2.1-9)

As libc++ links against glibc, this appears to be strictly an issue with
libstdc++ rather than glibc.

  1   2   >