https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Jakub: Can the bug be marked as resolved?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Oct 15 13:43:09 2018
New Revision: 265164
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265164&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-10-15 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.3.1, 8.1.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jun 7 11:56:25 2018
New Revision: 261272
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261272&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-06-07 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
Peter Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter at lekensteyn dot nl
--- Comment #12 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||belous.vs at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 8+ so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 19 20:47:29 2018
New Revision: 258663
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258663&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/84761
* sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux_libc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Distributions should never backport symbol additions to symbol versioned
libraries, unless they backport all the corresponding changes.
So no, I don't think this is an issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Filed https://reviews.llvm.org/D44623 upstream.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That won't really work, if you configure against one glibc version and run
against another one, that will still not work properly.
So I think we need something like:
--- libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #2)
> I think as there are already quite some __GLIBC_PREREQ uses in the
> sanitizer lib changing the above prototype appropriately would be
> good enough.
If th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, fw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
>
> --- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer ---
> This bit needs to change for glibc 2.27 and la
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84761
--- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer ---
This bit needs to change for glibc 2.27 and later:
#ifdef __i386__
# define DL_INTERNAL_FUNCTION __attribute__((regparm(3), stdcall))
#else
# define DL_INTERNAL_FUNCTION
#endif
We removed the regparm attri
17 matches
Mail list logo
