public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
@ 2024-02-01 7:14 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-01 7:18 ` [Bug target/113700] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 more replies)
0 siblings, 13 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com @ 2024-02-01 7:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
Bug ID: 113700
Summary: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and
__bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates
code for _Float16 and __bf16
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcc
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 57277
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57277&action=edit
_Float16 and __bf16 that breaks on Illumos
When compiling the code included in the .ii
files on illumos the output claims that it
can't find the symbols __extendhfdf2,
__extendbfsf2 and __truncsfbf2 .
Command line and output:
g++ -march=native -shared -shared-libgcc -fPIC -Wl,--no-undefined -o
f16-bf16.so f16-bf16.cc
Undefined first referenced
symbol in file
__extendhfdf2 f16-bf16.so-f16-bf16.o
__extendbfsf2 f16-bf16.so-f16-bf16.o
__truncsfbf2 f16-bf16.so-f16-bf16.o
ld: fatal: symbol referencing errors. No output written to f16-bf16.so
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
The -Wl,--no-undefined is used here to not have create a executable that links
to the so files
to cause the error.
-march=native is used since sse2 seems to be needed for f16 and bf16 on x86
platforms if I
understand the half-precision doc in gcc correctly, I used a system with sse2
when compiling this.
My own fix, that may not be correct:
I tried to add the gcc12 and up parts of
libgcc/config/i386/libgcc-glibc.ver to
libgcc/config/i386/libgcc-sol2.ver rebuilt
gcc and then it linked correctly.
Some maintainer could take a look at that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
@ 2024-02-01 7:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-01 7:57 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (11 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-01 7:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>I tried to add the gcc12 and up parts of
It is correct except it should just use GCC 14 I think.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-01 7:18 ` [Bug target/113700] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-01 7:57 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-01 15:17 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com @ 2024-02-01 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #2 from Niclas Rosenvik <youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> >I tried to add the gcc12 and up parts of
>
> It is correct except it should just use GCC 14 I think.
I forgot to mention that the problem with _Float16 aka
__extendhfdf2 has happened on gcc12 as well as gcc14.
If it was possible to not just choose one version of
gcc then I would have marked gcc12 to 14.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-01 7:18 ` [Bug target/113700] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-01 7:57 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
@ 2024-02-01 15:17 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-01 16:27 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (9 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-01 15:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2024-02-01
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Niclas Rosenvik from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > >I tried to add the gcc12 and up parts of
> >
> > It is correct except it should just use GCC 14 I think.
>
> I forgot to mention that the problem with _Float16 aka
> __extendhfdf2 has happened on gcc12 as well as gcc14.
> If it was possible to not just choose one version of
> gcc then I would have marked gcc12 to 14.
You cannot add symbols to symbol versions of older releases retroactively.
Since those versions (GCC_12.0.0, GCC_13.0.0, GCC_14.0.0) were overlooked
before the respective releases, all symbols that are listed in
i386/libgcc-glibc.ver in those versions need to be added to
i386/libgcc-sol2.ver in version GCC_14.0.0 (after verifying that they are
actually defined on Solaris/x86).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-01 15:17 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-01 16:27 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-02 9:27 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com @ 2024-02-01 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #4 from Niclas Rosenvik <youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #3)
> (In reply to Niclas Rosenvik from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > > >I tried to add the gcc12 and up parts of
> > >
> > > It is correct except it should just use GCC 14 I think.
> >
> > I forgot to mention that the problem with _Float16 aka
> > __extendhfdf2 has happened on gcc12 as well as gcc14.
> > If it was possible to not just choose one version of
> > gcc then I would have marked gcc12 to 14.
>
> You cannot add symbols to symbol versions of older releases retroactively.
> Since those versions (GCC_12.0.0, GCC_13.0.0, GCC_14.0.0) were overlooked
> before the respective releases, all symbols that are listed in
> i386/libgcc-glibc.ver in those versions need to be added to
> i386/libgcc-sol2.ver in version GCC_14.0.0 (after verifying that they are
> actually defined on Solaris/x86).
OK, thanks for explaining.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-01 16:27 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
@ 2024-02-02 9:27 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-02 10:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (7 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-02 9:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |andreast at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |iains at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target|x86_64-*-solaris* |x86_64-*-solaris*,
| |i?86-*-solaris*
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The problem is even more widespread than Solaris/x86: beside
i386/libgcc-sol2.ver,
there are i386/libgcc-darwin.ver (where the versions end at GCC_12.0.0) and
i386/libgcc-bsdver (stops at GCC_7.0.0, used by both t-freebsd and t-dragonfly;
the latter has no listed maintainer).
I wonder if we should add a prominent note to the end of i386/libgcc-glibc.ver
to notify other affected maintainers about additions. Those are way too easy
to overlook right now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-02 9:27 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-02 10:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2024-02-02 10:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2024-02-02 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
When looking at the 64-bit libgcc_s.so.1 on both Solaris/x86 and
Linux/i686, I noticed that all the new GCC_14.0.0 symbols from
libgcc-glibc.ver (and now libgcc-sol2.ver) have been demoted to local.
IIUC, this happens because the __PFX__ handling (substitution by
$(LIBGCC_VER_GNU_PREFIX) as needed) is only applied to libgcc-std.ver.in
by Makefile.in. In the i386/libgcc-*.ver files, this substitution
doesn't happen, the literal "__PFX__fixxfbitint" etc. symbols are not
found in any object, so the unprefixed ones are turned local.
From what I could see in config.host, LIBGCC_VER_GNU_PREFIX only applies
to non-x86 targets. Maybe we can just remove __PFX__ from
i386/libgcc-*.ver? Jakub?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-02 10:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2024-02-02 10:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-02 10:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-02 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I didn't know what it is.
But seems you're right, on x86_64-linux
252: 000000000001c1c0 1974 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 13 __floatbitintbf
253: 000000000001b200 1972 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 13 __fixxfbitint
262: 000000000001b9c0 2046 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 13 __floatbitinthf
266: 000000000001c980 1934 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 13 __floatbitintxf
271: 0000000000019220 2271 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 13 __fixtfbitint
276: 0000000000019b00 2166 FUNC LOCAL DEFAULT 13 __floatbitinttf
aren't exported even when they should be. Let me change it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-02 10:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-02 10:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-02 10:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-02 10:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The reason tests work is that we default to -static-libgcc in C, which contains
the symbols.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-02 10:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-02 10:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:01 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-02 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f5caef53e7808fef21111baf8e6ffac230b9863
commit r14-8750-g9f5caef53e7808fef21111baf8e6ffac230b9863
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Feb 2 11:46:34 2024 +0100
libgcc: Export XF, TF, HF and BFmode specific _BitInt symbols from
libgcc_s.so.1 [PR113700]
Rainer pointed out that __PFX__ and __FIXPTPFX__ prefix replacement is done
solely for libgcc-std.ver.in and not for the *.ver files in config.
I've used the __PFX__ prefix even in config/i386/libgcc-glibc.ver because
it
was used for similar symbols in libgcc-std.ver.in, and that results in
those
symbols being STB_LOCAL in libgcc_s.so.1. Tests still work because gcc by
default uses -static-libgcc when linking (unlike g++ etc.), but would
have failed when using -shared-libgcc (but I see nothing in the testsuite
actually testing with -shared-libgcc, so am not adding tests).
With the patch, libgcc_s.so.1 now exports
__fixtfbitint@@GCC_14.0.0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT
__fixxfbitint@@GCC_14.0.0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT
__floatbitintbf@@GCC_14.0.0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT
__floatbitinthf@@GCC_14.0.0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT
__floatbitinttf@@GCC_14.0.0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT
__floatbitintxf@@GCC_14.0.0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT
on x86_64-linux which it wasn't before.
2024-02-02 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR target/113700
* config/i386/libgcc-glibc.ver (GCC_14.0.0): Remove __PFX prefixes
from symbol names.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-02 10:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-06 9:01 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:07 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-06 9:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
| |il/gcc-patches/2024-Februar
| |y/645035.html
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Patch posted.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-06 9:01 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-06 9:07 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:23 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: iains at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-06 9:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #10)
> Patch posted.
FWIW Darwin is, indeed, also affected and I have patches in progress to resolve
it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-06 9:07 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-06 9:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:23 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-06 9:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth <ro@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c5f48b5fdde849759d0e3b4effd9352a2399d6f9
commit r14-8820-gc5f48b5fdde849759d0e3b4effd9352a2399d6f9
Author: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Date: Tue Feb 6 10:20:30 2024 +0100
libgcc: Export i386 symbols added after GCC_7.0.0 on Solaris [PR113700]
As reported in the PR, all libgcc x86 symbol versions added after
GCC_7.0.0 were only added to i386/libgcc-glibc.ver, missing all of
libgcc-sol2.ver, libgcc-bsd.ver, and libgcc-darwin.ver.
This patch fixes this for Solaris/x86, adding all of them
(GCC_1[234].0.0) as GCC_14.0.0 to not retroactively change history.
Since this isn't the first time this happens, I've added a note to the
end of libgcc-glibc.ver to request notifying other maintainers in case
of additions.
Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11.
2024-02-01 Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
libgcc:
PR target/113700
* config/i386/libgcc-sol2.ver (GCC_14.0.0): Added all symbols from
i386/libgcc-glibc.ver (GCC_12.0.0, GCC_13.0.0, GCC_14.0.0).
* config/i386/libgcc-glibc.ver: Request notifications on updates.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/113700] libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2024-02-06 9:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-02-06 9:23 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-02-06 9:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113700
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Mine. Fixed for GCC 14.0.0. Thanks for the report.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-06 9:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-02-01 7:14 [Bug libgcc/113700] New: libgcc_s does not include symbols for _Float16 and __bf16 on Solaris/Illumos even though gcc generates code for _Float16 and __bf16 youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-01 7:18 ` [Bug target/113700] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-01 7:57 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-01 15:17 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-01 16:27 ` youremailsarecrap at gmail dot com
2024-02-02 9:27 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-02 10:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2024-02-02 10:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-02 10:24 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-02 10:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:01 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:07 ` iains at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:21 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-02-06 9:23 ` ro 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).