From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10880 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2007 14:20:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 10830 invoked by uid 48); 28 Nov 2007 14:20:42 -0000 Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20071128142042.10829.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/34115] atomic builtins not supported on i686? In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "scovich at gmail dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg02779.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from scovich at gmail dot com 2007-11-28 14:20 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > Too bad they aren't defined for any machine I've tried so far... > > The explanation is very simple: the new macros are implemented only in mainline > (would be 4.3.0). > Any chance of backporting? (I know, probably not) The only question left is whether the compiler is supposed to emit a warning when it doesn't support the intrinsics (like the docs say) or whether the user should just be ready for linker errors. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34115