From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id E0E03384F490; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 18:10:23 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E0E03384F490
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1669054223;
	bh=/jP0pm2o/PST/XeKvVSwYvY4eTGUTo4OmkwLldNy6lg=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=ZxEVpCDVyWWZ81D5e9p5hfT3d+UqxowsDH/7KhXacwBZKkeNZ+F4Fw9FAmGmZikA7
	 RXoh9/6/75uoNVHB2JHiJPRf09WHnZ+DY3SeInYs4BfDWxTOYI1VmCnZ/O9UQZ2YDr
	 H03l3TWkhVGoDMEmzGFeSHs6RZliHOujvG39siOA=
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/107405] [13 Regression] enum change causing Linux kernel to
 fail to build due to Linux depending on old behavior
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 18:10:22 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107405-4-oF2hdnD3e5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107405-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107405-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107405

--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery=
 dot com> ---
On Sat, 19 Nov 2022, macro at orcam dot me.uk via Gcc-bugs wrote:

> If in older C standard versions such enums are invalid, then I think
> this should be a hard error rather than a silent ABI change for the code
> produced.  Not all code out there will have sanity checks such as the

There is no ABI change.  The size of the enum type does not change.  What=20
changes is the type given to enum constants in such an enum, if the value=20
of the enum constant fits in int (now all enum constants in such an enum=20
have the enum type rather than only those outside the range of int having=20
the enum type).=