[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #29 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #22 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- > @all: Could you please test it on your machines, and let me know if it causes > any further issues ? I plan to commit it i

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #28 from Sam James --- Gah, I have to apologise. I spent a while trying to craft a Dockerfile and it worked every time. I got suspicious, tried a regular build in packaging, using the same method of fetching the patch as the Dockerfil

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #27 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hmm, that's unfortunate :/ Looking at the log, it says: /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: skipping incompatible /var/tmp/

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #26 from Sam James --- If you need me to, I can try create a Dockerfile or something to reproduce it, if you can't.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #25 from Sam James --- Created attachment 60050 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60050&action=edit config.log.xz

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #24 from Sam James --- Created attachment 60049 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60049&action=edit build.log.xz (I tried emailing this but nvidia's mail system rejected it and thought it looked like spam.) Unfort

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #23 from Sam James --- Hi Prathamesh, I'll pull it in to our patchset and let you know of any problems. Appreciate again you two working on this because it's going to solve a lot of pain and hackery needed in build systems.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #22 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hi, the patch posted at: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/attachments/20241220/0c361030/attachment-0001.txt fixes the issues with multilib configs and libdruntime. @all: Could yo

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #20 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #19 from Tobias Burnus --- > (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #18) >> This patch broke Solaris bootstrap when linking libgdruntime.la (both sparc >> and x86, most lik

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #19 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #18) > This patch broke Solaris bootstrap when linking libgdruntime.la (both sparc > and x86, most likely almost everywhere) in stage 1 already: See also patch submissi

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #18 from

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #17 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Prathamesh Kulkarni : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e2f6ed54f75bbf8dd0292af90304890f06a9be17 commit r15-6337-ge2f6ed54f75bbf8dd0292af90304890f06a9be17 Author: Prathamesh Kulkarn

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 John Scott changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jscott at posteo dot net --- Comment #16 fr

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #15 from Adrian Bunk --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #11) > RFC draft patch – also to solve an offload problem with atomic and nvptx > libgomp: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/556297.html > See rep

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jeffrey Walton from comment #13) > Add a mee too. When using sanitizers, like -fsanitize=undefined, the > compiler driver is not adding the necessary libraries to link the program. That's a r

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #13 from Jeffrey Walton --- Add a mee too. When using sanitizers, like -fsanitize=undefined, the compiler driver is not adding the necessary libraries to link the program. Ugh... https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/1141#issue

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com ---

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab --- All these failure modes can already be observed on riscv-linux, where -pthread implies -latomic.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I should also note the testsuite point I mentioned in the BoF, and related points about building target libraries, which mean this is more complicated than just the driver specs change: Th

Re: [Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

I should also note the testsuite point I mentioned in the BoF, and related points about building target libraries, which mean this is more complicated than just the driver specs change: There is testsuite logic (see gcc/testsuite/lib/atomic-dg.exp) to locate libatomic for build-tree testing and

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab --- See also bug 84568 and bug 86005.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #7 from Joseph S. Myers --- This came up in the RISC-V BoF today.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- The design of what's in separate libraries is historical; since it probably predates shared libraries, the reason isn't obvious (with shared libraries, before --as-needed, it avoided unnece

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #5 from Jeff Hammond --- Indeed, _Atomic is a language keyword and doesn't require any headers (the inclusion of stdatomic.h in this code is superfluous), so the "header->explicit library" argument doesn't apply. In any case, I do no

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- In the libm case, POSIX has an explicit list of headers whose functions may require particular libraries to be linked in. libatomic is required for use of language features without any ref

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- See what I said in - I think linking --as-needed -latomic --no-as-needed makes sense by default when --as-needed is supported. T

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- That doesn't mean that the mistake should be repeated.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- That seems similar to using sqrt, which requires explicitly linking with libm.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||link-failure Targe