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 6D651385220B; Sun,  4 Dec 2022 11:59:19 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6D651385220B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1670155159;
	bh=vuu9KiYrjZ3Eiz7ZxCZnQoTJUN/jQL070DT9MjF6Hg0=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=NlTOucBhPXlRyV8YixWchqy1uo6HsY1TEwjBnIQTkM7VItiMsVEXqYx+ZbgSgwe5e
	 PVHnjchXEPcEoyZ/pr60wCkRBuTS3prF9GZrI9CbE6GFDfTYvCvCXm+mhq5ESMjBtX
	 DZChQoz2x/Ywm15AEUmw9ZpRTqyqW4LiPB2h4ZIo=
From: "jdx at o2 dot pl" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/107801] Building cross compiler for H8 family fails
 in libstdc++ (c++17/memory_resource.cc)
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2022 11:59:16 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jdx at o2 dot pl
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: 11.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107801-4-mkEWkbtMT4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107801-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107801-4@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=3D107801

--- Comment #17 from Jan Dubiec <jdx at o2 dot pl> ---
Thanks Jonathan. I have also applied g:7b79fa930917da735f02b4f6911dfbb0a91f=
9714
and finally successfully built libstdc++, however there is a bunch of warni=
ngs
for review. There are no assembler errors for src/c++17/fs_dir.cc in 12.2
(binutils 2.39).

A question regarding g:75e562d2c4303d3918be9d1563284b0c580c5e45 in relation=
 to
g:a7b97a1f6b9d4993545525fd5cb334ae640ddf45 =E2=80=93 don't you think that

          _M_blocks_per_chunk =3D std::min<size_t>({
              max_blocks,
              __opts.max_blocks_per_chunk,
              _M_blocks_per_chunk * 2
          });

looks nicer than

          _M_blocks_per_chunk =3D std::min({
              max_blocks,
              __opts.max_blocks_per_chunk,
              size_t(_M_blocks_per_chunk * 2)
          });=