https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102772
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=77691
--- Comment #35 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
That said, this would probably fix it:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_op.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_op.cc
@@ -41,6 +41,11 @@ extern "C" void *malloc (std::size_t);
_GLIBCXX_WEAK_DEFINITION void *
operator new (std::size_t sz) _GLIBCXX_THROW (std::bad_alloc)
{
+#if defined __sun && defined __i386__
+ if (sz >= 16)
+ return ::operator new(sz, std::align_val_t(16));
+#endif
+
void *p;
/* malloc (0) is unpredictable; avoid it. */
As noted in PR 77691, there are other targets where GCC's max_align_t does not
match the target malloc. That includes vxworks and mingw*.
