public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/102772] [12 regression] g++.dg/torture/pr80334.C FAILs Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 13:31:11 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-102772-4-39HolDSq40@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-102772-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102772 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- There is a general question if we shouldn't give up in can_increase_alignment_p for all DECL_THREAD_LOCAL_P vars because increasing their alignment doesn't mean just a few wasted bytes per process due to the alignment, but a few wasted bytes per thread (TLS space is or should be far more space constrained than normal data or rodata sections). But even if we do that, the question is if alignas(16) thread_local vars etc. work on Solaris.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-21 13:31 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-15 11:39 [Bug target/102772] New: " ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-15 11:40 ` [Bug target/102772] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-15 11:40 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-15 11:40 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-15 12:06 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2021-10-15 13:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-10-15 14:29 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2021-10-15 20:44 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2021-11-16 11:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-11-23 12:36 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-17 15:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-17 15:14 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-21 11:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-21 12:01 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-21 12:03 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-21 12:03 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-21 13:17 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-21 13:31 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-03-22 15:12 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-22 17:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-23 13:56 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-23 14:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-23 14:17 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-25 12:48 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-25 12:53 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-25 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-25 13:00 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-25 13:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-25 13:13 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-25 13:18 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-25 13:22 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-25 13:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 14:06 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 14:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 14:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 14:56 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 15:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 15:13 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-30 15:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-31 13:46 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-03-31 13:47 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-31 14:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-31 14:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-31 14:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-31 15:15 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-31 15:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-04 11:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-11 9:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-11 14:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-04-11 14:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-04-11 15:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-12 7:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-04-13 14:47 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2022-05-06 8:31 ` [Bug target/102772] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-08 12:22 ` [Bug target/102772] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-102772-4-39HolDSq40@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).