------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-13 21:13 ------- > So this should be treated as a known latent bug, a testcase which fails or > passes at random on targets requiring strict alignment? In which case > there should be an effective-target keyword for strict alignment and the > testcase should be xfailed on all such targets?
Yes, I think the testcase should be simply xfaild on targets requiring strict alignment, that is, requiring alignment strictly > alignment(char) for memory involved in atomic operations. Currently (*) basic_string doesn't rebind the passed allocator to one sufficiently aligned for atomic memory, sadly. (*) Since we don't want to break the library ABI anytime soon, probably I will try again to fix this long standing bug within v6 (while also keep on working on the next basic_string in v7). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21554
