[Bug c/63592] Linux kernel build failure due to duplicate exported symbols

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63592

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Igor Zamyatin from comment #4)
> The same could be seen for 253.perlbmk and 400.perlbench tests from
> spec2K/2006 suites

That is a bug in the SPEC CPU also.
There is a define for __attribute__ which causes the issue.  I decided to use
-std=gnu90 when compiling SPEC CPU as a portability flag.

[Bug c/63592] Linux kernel build failure due to duplicate exported symbols

[izamyatin at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63592

Igor Zamyatin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||izamyatin at gmail dot com

--- Comment #4 from Igor Zamyatin  ---
The same could be seen for 253.perlbmk and 400.perlbench tests from spec2K/2006
suites

[Bug c/63592] Linux kernel build failure due to duplicate exported symbols

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63592

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

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

--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski  ---
(In reply to Sasha Levin from comment #2)
> But that... worked previously? Is backward compatibility intended to be
> broken in this case?

GNU 90 and C99 have different "extern inline" behavior and has been mentioned
for the last 5 or so years now.  What changed was defaulting to the C99/C11
behavior rather than the GNU90 behavior.

This is a kernel bug and should be reported/fixed there instead.

[Bug c/63592] Linux kernel build failure due to duplicate exported symbols

[sasha.levin at oracle dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63592

--- Comment #2 from Sasha Levin  ---
But that... worked previously? Is backward compatibility intended to be broken
in this case?