public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
@ 2023-05-16 23:14 ed at catmur dot uk
2023-05-16 23:26 ` [Bug libstdc++/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (16 more replies)
0 siblings, 17 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: ed at catmur dot uk @ 2023-05-16 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
Bug ID: 109882
Summary: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively
includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ed at catmur dot uk
Target Milestone: ---
Since 12.3.0, when compiled under tsan (-fsanitize=thread), #include <memory>
transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h:
#include <memory>
#if defined SANITIZER_COMMON_INTERFACE_DEFS_H
#error :(
#endif
This is problematic for us because sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h has
#define __has_feature(x) 0
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blame/5d85b5d649fff675ff00adcc99371bccf4ef5944/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h#L20
which makes our sanitizer detector incorrectly believe that __has_feature is
available and that tsan is not in fact present since
__has_feature(thread_sanitizer) evaluates to 0.
We will fix the order of checks to put `#ifdef __SANITIZE_THREAD__` first but
thought we should probably report this to help other users.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/109882] -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
@ 2023-05-16 23:26 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:27 ` [Bug sanitizer/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-16 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
__has_feature is being added ....
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
2023-05-16 23:26 ` [Bug libstdc++/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-16 23:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-16 23:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|libstdc++ |sanitizer
CC| |dodji at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |kcc at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Anyways I am going to declare this a bug in the sanitizer headers rather than
libstdc++ headers.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
2023-05-16 23:26 ` [Bug libstdc++/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:27 ` [Bug sanitizer/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-16 23:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:45 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-16 23:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Then you should file this bug upstream with the sanitizer for the way
__has_feature is handled incorrectly.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-16 23:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-16 23:45 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-17 8:19 ` [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-16 23:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2023-05-16
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The header is included since r13-2677-g0abc63a5ea4550 (and
r12-9342-g0cec4e9cd44e25 on the branch), and not including it would mean not
being able to annotate atomic<shared_ptr<T>>.
I agree with Andrew, this is a bug in libsanitizer. The correct way to use
__has_feature in a public header is to test with #ifdef __has_feature not to
define the fallback definition.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-16 23:45 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-17 8:19 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-17 8:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-17 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Libstdc++ itself does this:
#if __SANITIZE_THREAD__
# define _GLIBCXX_TSAN 1
#elif defined __has_feature
# if __has_feature(thread_sanitizer)
# define _GLIBCXX_TSAN 1
# endif
#endif
The sanitizers could do something similar, although it looks like they don't
actually need to. The only use of __has_feature in the public API is in
asan_interface.h and that could easily be replaced. Then __has_feature can be
redefined in the internal headers, which (I assume) aren't meant to be included
by user code.
Something like this (untested):
diff --git a/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/asan_interface.h
b/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/asan_interface.h
index 9bff21c117b..186269ad694 100644
--- a/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/asan_interface.h
+++ b/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/asan_interface.h
@@ -48,7 +48,15 @@ void __asan_poison_memory_region(void const volatile *addr,
size_t size);
void __asan_unpoison_memory_region(void const volatile *addr, size_t size);
// Macros provided for convenience.
-#if __has_feature(address_sanitizer) || defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
+#ifdef __has_feature
+#if __has_feature(address_sanitizer)
+#define ASAN_DEFINE_REGION_MACROS
+#endif
+#elif defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
+#define ASAN_DEFINE_REGION_MACROS
+#endif
+
+#ifdef ASAN_DEFINE_REGION_MACROS
/// Marks a memory region as unaddressable.
///
/// \note Macro provided for convenience; defined as a no-op if ASan is not
@@ -74,6 +82,7 @@ void __asan_unpoison_memory_region(void const volatile *addr,
size_t size);
#define ASAN_UNPOISON_MEMORY_REGION(addr, size) \
((void)(addr), (void)(size))
#endif
+#undef ASAN_DEFINE_REGION_MACROS
/// Checks if an address is poisoned.
///
diff --git a/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
b/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
index 2f415bd9e85..2f9c83ef74e 100644
--- a/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
+++ b/libsanitizer/include/sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h
@@ -15,11 +15,6 @@
#include <stddef.h>
#include <stdint.h>
-// GCC does not understand __has_feature.
-#if !defined(__has_feature)
-#define __has_feature(x) 0
-#endif
-
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" {
#endif
diff --git a/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h
b/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h
index 98186c429e9..7574dce7f4a 100644
--- a/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h
+++ b/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h
@@ -14,6 +14,11 @@
#include "sanitizer_platform.h"
+// GCC does not understand __has_feature.
+#if !defined(__has_feature)
+#define __has_feature(x) 0
+#endif
+
#ifndef SANITIZER_DEBUG
# define SANITIZER_DEBUG 0
#endif
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-17 8:19 ` [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-17 8:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-17 11:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-17 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Looks ok to me. Now how to convince upstream to apply this? (Or we could keep
it as LOCAL_PATCHES.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-17 8:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-17 11:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-18 12:50 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-17 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'll do a little more testing and submit it upstream.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-17 11:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-18 12:50 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-18 22:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-18 12:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Submitted upstream as https://reviews.llvm.org/D150866
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2023-05-18 12:50 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-18 22:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-09 10:05 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-18 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Resubmitted now that LLVM uses github pull requests:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66628
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2023-09-18 22:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-09 10:05 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-09 10:12 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-09 10:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The fix has been committed upstream now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-09 10:05 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-09 10:12 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 11:57 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: sjames at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-09 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://github.com/llvm/llv
| |m-project/pull/66628
--- Comment #11 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We could really do with a general sync of libsanitizer as well.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-09 10:12 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-15 11:57 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:36 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: sjames at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-15 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #12 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #11)
> We could really do with a general sync of libsanitizer as well.
Done by jakub in r14-5487.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-15 11:57 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-15 12:36 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:37 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-15 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Nice, that includes my fix, so we can close this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-15 12:36 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-15 12:37 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-15 12:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> The header is included since r13-2677-g0abc63a5ea4550 (and
> r12-9342-g0cec4e9cd44e25 on the branch), and not including it would mean not
> being able to annotate atomic<shared_ptr<T>>.
Although it's still present on the branches. Do we want to fix it there too?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-15 12:37 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-15 12:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:47 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-27 11:08 ` acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-15 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think so, but for release branches obviously only as a cherry-pick of that
single change, not a merge.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-15 12:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-15 12:47 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-27 11:08 ` acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: sjames at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-15 12:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
--- Comment #16 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
While at it, should do PR111057 too.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2023-11-15 12:47 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-11-27 11:08 ` acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-11-27 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109882
Bug 109882 depends on bug 60512, which changed state.
Bug 60512 Summary: would be useful if gcc implemented __has_feature similarly to clang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60512
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-27 11:08 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-05-16 23:14 [Bug libstdc++/109882] New: -fsanitize=thread #include <memory> transitively includes sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h ed at catmur dot uk
2023-05-16 23:26 ` [Bug libstdc++/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:27 ` [Bug sanitizer/109882] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-16 23:45 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-17 8:19 ` [Bug sanitizer/109882] sanitizer/common_interface_defs.h bogusly defines __has_feature redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-17 8:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-17 11:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-18 12:50 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-18 22:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-09 10:05 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-09 10:12 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 11:57 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:36 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:37 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-15 12:47 ` sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-11-27 11:08 ` acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
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).