http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #54 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-21
21:27:57 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Jan 21 21:27:49 2012
New Revision: 183376
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=183376
Log:
PR libstdc++/50982
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #52 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-15
14:29:28 UTC ---
I rebuilt with the libstdc++-v3 testsuite patch, but the 30_thread tests did
not run.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #53 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-15
14:54:16 UTC ---
Then I'm confused - the tests should depend on availability of the same
features as the code, and the code is now compiled on AIX (as we know because
it was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #51 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-01-14
18:12:25 UTC ---
Created attachment 26325
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26325
enable mutex tests on aix
David, would you be able to apply this patch and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #49 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-22
18:46:20 UTC ---
libstdc++ testsuite does not appear to run 30_ thread tests on AIX. What
controls this? The testsuite probably assumes that it is testing
single-threaded
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #50 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-22
19:03:02 UTC ---
Those tests have a target selector, which doesn't include AIX:
{ target *-*-freebsd* *-*-netbsd* *-*-linux* *-*-solaris* *-*-cygwin
*-*-darwin*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #48 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-12-22
02:20:43 UTC ---
what's the status of the 30_threads tests now on AIX?
do these results include the threads tests?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #43 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07
15:04:30 UTC ---
Jonathan,
Your patch works, but Rainer still has not checked in his original patch fixing
gthr headers, AFAIK.
Thanks, David
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #44 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07
15:12:26 UTC ---
Great, thanks - we can leave it open for now until it's fully resolved.
As I said in comment 28, we might need to adjust the libstdc++ testsuite now
that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #45 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07 16:34:37
UTC ---
Author: ro
Date: Mon Nov 7 16:34:31 2011
New Revision: 181095
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181095
Log:
Return gthr-posix.h to libgcc (PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #46 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07 16:43:35
UTC ---
David,
I had been waiting to see if the remaining AIX gthread issues were releated to
my patch. Since that's not the case and my own testing had completed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #47 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-11-07 16:45:36 UTC ---
--- Comment #44 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07
15:12:26 UTC ---
Great, thanks - we can leave it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #40 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07
07:34:05 UTC ---
I've tracked this behaviour down to cp_parser_parameter_declaration_clause in
cp/parser.c which has a special case for
else if (token-type ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #41 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07
07:54:12 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Nov 7 07:54:06 2011
New Revision: 181072
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181072
Log:
PR libstdc++/50982
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #42 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-07
07:55:36 UTC ---
This should be fixed now, could you test again? Thanks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|bootstrap |libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #32 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
14:29:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
On AIX pthread_once_t is a struct containing an array:
typedef struct
{
#ifdef __64BIT__
long__on_word[9];
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #34 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
15:51:54 UTC ---
I am trying to bootstrap with --disable-multilib to at least be able to build
GCC while we try to fix this.
Adding the braces removes the first error, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #35 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
15:54:45 UTC ---
And the single set of braces appears to be an AIX header bug. But it is not
fixed in any later AIX releases through AIX 7.1. I suspect this will require
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #36 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
16:09:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #31)
Adding the braces removes the first error, but
In file included from /farm/dje/src/src/libstdc++-v3/src/atomic.cc:28:0:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #37 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
16:18:24 UTC ---
Yes, the patch in comment 36 appears to fix the second errorr. Thanks! I
really appreciate the help.
I guess I need to work on fixincludes for the AIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #38 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
16:31:36 UTC ---
Well that's *really* strange. The declaration is a C++ function in C++ code,
the extern C doesn't alter that, and void f() is identical to void f(void) in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50982
--- Comment #39 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-05
16:58:29 UTC ---
I am not aware of any AIX-specific rules.
25 matches
Mail list logo
