From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 12F633858C74; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 11:05:00 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 12F633858C74 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1681988700; bh=81d2rvI4yereg87NGEjLdoDbD7FxVdIECL70nEyRQi4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=pj7FfQ4IRqhVhZlFi0oqFzv7PdBUph5aB02OluVxihxcgUrf1OyBbRx5vVnl4BBL/ dCoo5erdmufX/jlPBGqDj8TqmhGilfAz1/s89h6WGBCVmMNr27BvQCUqsRwicfToR5 E5OZ7hzJy4KmKT5vHp+H3C/4WmmOTgcBjyiEmcDQ= From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libgcc/109540] Y2038: GCC gthr-posix.h weakref symbol invoking function has impact on time values Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 11:04:59 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libgcc X-Bugzilla-Version: 9.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status everconfirmed cf_reconfirmed_on Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109540 Jonathan Wakely changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed| |2023-04-20 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- It works correctly with 10.4.1 and 11.3.0 and 12.1.0 so it looks like this isn't true: (In reply to Puneet B from comment #3) > It can be reproduceable in gcc master branch or latest release..dont look= at > it as GCC particular version bug. You haven't provided a testcase though, so we don't know what you're seeing= .=