[Bug libstdc++/114103] New: FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[Bug libstdc++/114103] New: FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[danglin at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

            Bug ID: 114103
           Summary: FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc
                    -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)
           Product: gcc
           Version: 14.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: libstdc++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---
              Host: hppa64-hp-hpux11.11
            Target: hppa64-hp-hpux11.11
             Build: hppa64-hp-hpux11.11

spawn -ignore SIGHUP /home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/./gcc/xg++ -shared-libgcc
-B/ho
me/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-
hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/
libstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc
++-v3/libsupc++/.libs -B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/
-B/opt/gn
u64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/lib/ -isystem
/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp
-hpux11.11/include -isystem
/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/sys-includ
e -fchecking=1
-B/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/./libstdc++-v3/
src/.libs -fmessage-length=0 -fno-show-column -ffunction-sections
-fdata-section
s -O2 -g -DLOCALEDIR="." -nostdinc++
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpu
x11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/include/backward
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc
-std=gnu++20 -D__GLIBCXX__=99999999 -fdiagnostics-plain-output -S -o
lock_free_aliases.s
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:33:
error: static assertion failed
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:34:
error: static assertion failed
compiler exited with status 1
FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc  -std=gnu++20 (test for excess
errors)
Excess errors:
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:33:
error: static assertion failed
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:34:
error: static assertion failed

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We define them as:

#ifdef __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
# ifdef _GLIBCXX_HAVE_PLATFORM_WAIT
  using atomic_signed_lock_free
    = atomic<make_signed_t<__detail::__platform_wait_t>>;
  using atomic_unsigned_lock_free
    = atomic<make_unsigned_t<__detail::__platform_wait_t>>;
# elif ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE || !(ATOMIC_LONG_LOCK_FREE ||
ATOMIC_CHAR_LOCK_FREE)
  using atomic_signed_lock_free = atomic<signed int>;
  using atomic_unsigned_lock_free = atomic<unsigned int>;
# elif ATOMIC_LONG_LOCK_FREE
  using atomic_signed_lock_free = atomic<signed long>;
  using atomic_unsigned_lock_free = atomic<unsigned long>;
# elif ATOMIC_CHAR_LOCK_FREE
  using atomic_signed_lock_free = atomic<signed char>;
  using atomic_unsigned_lock_free = atomic<unsigned char>;
# else
# error "libstdc++ bug: no lock-free atomics but they were emitted in
<version>"
# endif
#endif


And then test them with:

static_assert( std::atomic_signed_lock_free::is_always_lock_free );
static_assert( std::atomic_unsigned_lock_free::is_always_lock_free );


I assume the problem is that the ATOMIC_xxx_LOCK_FREE macros have value 1 not
2, so they're not unconditionally lock-free.

Are any of the atomic integer types always lock-free for this target?

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 57539
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57539&action=edit
make lock-free aliases actually check for lock  freedom

Maybe we want to do this.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #57539|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 57540
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57540&action=edit
make lock-free aliases actually check for lock  freedom

Oops, let's try that again without unrelated changes in the patch.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-02-26 5:54 a.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I assume the problem is that the ATOMIC_xxx_LOCK_FREE macros have value 1 not
> 2, so they're not unconditionally lock-free.
>
> Are any of the atomic integer types always lock-free for this target?
No.  The only "lock free" operations are load and clear word/double word.

On linux, we fudge the support in the kernel where we can disable interrupts
but the operation
still can spin.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
OK then I think we don't want these aliases to be defined at all (which means
we cannot be fully C++20 conformant) and the test should be xfailed or skipped.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-02-26 7:22 a.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> OK then I think we don't want these aliases to be defined at all (which means
> we cannot be fully C++20 conformant) and the test should be xfailed or skipped.
That's what I was thinking.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |patch
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2024-02-27
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/646619.html

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #8 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-02-27 9:32 a.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Patch posted:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/646619.html
Will test on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 on my next build.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #9 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-02-27 9:32 a.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Patch posted:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-February/646619.html
Caused build error:

libtool: compile:  /home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/home
/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp
-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/li
bstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++
-v3/libsupc++/.libs -B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/
-B/opt/gnu6
4/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/lib/ -isystem
/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-h
pux11.11/include -isystem /opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/sys-include
-fno-checking -I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/../libgcc 
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++ -std=gnu++20 
-D_GLIBCXX_SHARED -fno-implicit-templates -Wall -Wextra -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wabi=2 -fdiagnostics-show-location=once -ffunction-sections 
-fdata-sections -frandom-seed=tzdb.lo -fimplicit-templates -O2 -g -I. -c
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc  -DPIC 
-D_GLIBCXX_SHARED -o tzdb.o
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:654:9: error:
'atomic_signed_lock_free' does not name a type
   654 |         atomic_signed_lock_free counter{0};
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:706:18: error:
'atomic_signed_lock_free' was not declared in this scope; did you mean 
'atomic_is_lock_free'?
   706 |     RulesCounter<atomic_signed_lock_free> rules_counter;
       |                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       |                  atomic_is_lock_free
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:706:41: error: template
argument 1 is invalid
   706 |     RulesCounter<atomic_signed_lock_free> rules_counter;
       |                                         ^
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In member function 'void
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl::RulesCounter<_Tp>::increment()':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:658:11: error: 'counter' was
not declared in this scope; did you mean 'count'?
   658 |         { counter.fetch_add(1, memory_order::relaxed); }
       |           ^~~~~~~
       |           count
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In member function 'void
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl::RulesCounter<_Tp>::decrement()':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:668:17: error: 'counter' was
not declared in this scope; did you mean 'count'?
   668 |           if (++counter == 0)
       |                 ^~~~~~~
       |                 count
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In member function 'void
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl::RulesCounter<_Tp>::lock()':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:679:25: error: 'counter' was
not declared in this scope; did you mean 'count'?
   679 |           for (auto c = counter.load(memory_order::relaxed); c != 0;)
       |                         ^~~~~~~
       |                         count
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In member function 'void
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl::RulesCounter<_Tp>::unlock()':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:697:24: error: 'counter' was
not declared in this scope; did you mean 'count'?
   697 |           if (auto c = counter.load(memory_order::relaxed); c < 0)
       |                        ^~~~~~~
       |                        count
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In member function
'std::chrono::sys_info 
std::chrono::time_zone::_M_get_sys_info(std::chrono::sys_seconds) const':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:969:32: error: request for
member 'decrement' in '((const 
std::chrono::time_zone*)this)->std::chrono::time_zone::_M_impl.std::unique_ptr<std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl>::operator->()->std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl::rules_counter', 
which is of non-class type 'int'
   969 |         _M_impl->rules_counter.decrement();
       |                                ^~~~~~~~~
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In function 'const
std::chrono::tzdb& std::chrono::reload_tzdb()':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:1488:38: error: request for
member 'increment' in 
'impl.std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl::rules_counter', which is of non-class type
'int'
  1488 |                   impl.rules_counter.increment();
       |                                      ^~~~~~~~~
In file included from
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/atomic_wait.h:51,
                  from
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/atomic_base.h:42,
                  from
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/atomic:50,
                  from ../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:35:
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_mutex.h:
In instantiation of 
'std::lock_guard<_Mutex>::lock_guard(mutex_type&) [with _Mutex = int;
mutex_type = int]':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:779:43:   required from here
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:1488:38: error: 779 |    
lock_guard lock(_M_impl->rules_counter);
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:1488:38: error:       |      
                                    ^
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_mutex.h:250:19:
error: request for member 'lock' in 
'((std::lock_guard<int>*)this)->std::lock_guard<int>::_M_device', which is of
non-class type 'std::lock_guard<int>::mutex_type' {aka 'int'}
   250 |       { _M_device.lock(); }
       |         ~~~~~~~~~~^~~~
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_mutex.h:
In instantiation of 
'std::lock_guard<_Mutex>::~lock_guard() [with _Mutex = int]':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:779:43:   required from here
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_mutex.h:250:19:
error:   779 |     lock_guard 
lock(_M_impl->rules_counter);
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_mutex.h:250:19:
error:       
|                                           ^
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_mutex.h:257:19:
error: request for member 'unlock' in 
'((std::lock_guard<int>*)this)->std::lock_guard<int>::_M_device', which is of
non-class type 'std::lock_guard<int>::mutex_type' {aka 'int'}
   257 |       { _M_device.unlock(); }
       |         ~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~
make[6]: *** [Makefile:754: tzdb.lo] Error 1

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |13.3
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This additional change should fix that:

--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
@@ -643,6 +643,7 @@ namespace std::chrono
        void unlock() { infos_mutex.unlock(); }
       };

+#if __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
 #if defined __GTHREADS && __cpp_lib_atomic_wait
     // Atomic count of unexpanded ZoneInfo objects in the infos vector.
     // Concurrent access is allowed when all objects have been expanded.
@@ -704,6 +705,7 @@ namespace std::chrono
 #endif // __GTHREADS && __cpp_lib_atomic_wait

     RulesCounter<atomic_signed_lock_free> rules_counter;
+#endif // __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
 #else // TZDB_DISABLED
     _Impl(weak_ptr<tzdb_list::_Node>) { }
     struct {

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #11 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-02-29 12:44 p.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103
>
> --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> This additional change should fix that:
>
> --- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
> @@ -643,6 +643,7 @@ namespace std::chrono
>          void unlock() { infos_mutex.unlock(); }
>         };
>
> +#if __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
>   #if defined __GTHREADS && __cpp_lib_atomic_wait
>       // Atomic count of unexpanded ZoneInfo objects in the infos vector.
>       // Concurrent access is allowed when all objects have been expanded.
> @@ -704,6 +705,7 @@ namespace std::chrono
>   #endif // __GTHREADS && __cpp_lib_atomic_wait
>
>       RulesCounter<atomic_signed_lock_free> rules_counter;
> +#endif // __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
>   #else // TZDB_DISABLED
>       _Impl(weak_ptr<tzdb_list::_Node>) { }
>       struct {
Now we get:

libtool: compile:  /home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/./gcc -nostdinc++ 
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs 
-L/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/.libs
-B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/bin/ 
-B/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/lib/ -isystem
/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/include -isystem 
/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-14/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/sys-include -fno-checking
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/../libgcc 
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/objdir64/hppa64-hp-hpux11.11/libstdc++-v3/include
-I/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++ -std=gnu++20 
-D_GLIBCXX_SHARED -fno-implicit-templates -Wall -Wextra -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wabi=2 -fdiagnostics-show-location=once -ffunction-sections 
-fdata-sections -frandom-seed=tzdb.lo -fimplicit-templates -O2 -g -I. -c
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc  -DPIC 
-D_GLIBCXX_SHARED -o tzdb.o
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In member function
'std::chrono::sys_info 
std::chrono::time_zone::_M_get_sys_info(std::chrono::sys_seconds) const':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:781:30: error: 'struct
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl' has no member named 'rules_counter'; did 
you mean 'RulesCounter'?
   781 |     lock_guard lock(_M_impl->rules_counter);
       |                              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
       |                              RulesCounter
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:971:18: error: 'struct
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl' has no member named 'rules_counter'; did 
you mean 'RulesCounter'?
   971 |         _M_impl->rules_counter.decrement();
       |                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
       |                  RulesCounter
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc: In function 'const
std::chrono::tzdb& std::chrono::reload_tzdb()':
../../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc:1490:24: error: 'struct
std::chrono::time_zone::_Impl' has no member named 'rules_counter'; 
did you mean 'RulesCounter'?
  1490 |                   impl.rules_counter.increment();
       |                        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
       |                        RulesCounter

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Ah yes, it still needs some rules_counter, just not using the lock-free alias:

--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ namespace std::chrono
 #endif // __GTHREADS && __cpp_lib_atomic_wait

     RulesCounter<atomic_signed_lock_free> rules_counter;
+#else
+    RulesCounter<void> rules_counter;
 #endif // __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
 #else // TZDB_DISABLED
     _Impl(weak_ptr<tzdb_list::_Node>) { }

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Ah yes, it still needs some rules_counter, just not using the lock-free alias:

--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++20/tzdb.cc
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ namespace std::chrono
 #endif // __GTHREADS && __cpp_lib_atomic_wait

     RulesCounter<atomic_signed_lock_free> rules_counter;
+#else
+    RulesCounter<void> rules_counter;
 #endif // __cpp_lib_atomic_lock_free_type_aliases
 #else // TZDB_DISABLED
     _Impl(weak_ptr<tzdb_list::_Node>) { }

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #57540|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 57591
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57591&action=edit
Do not define lock-free atomic aliases if not fully lock-free

Here's all of that as a single (slightly cleaned up) patch.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #15 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-03-01 5:42 p.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103
>
> Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
>
>             What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Attachment #57540|0                           |1
>          is obsolete|                            |
>
> --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Created attachment 57591
>    --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57591&action=edit
> Do not define lock-free atomic aliases if not fully lock-free
>
> Here's all of that as a single (slightly cleaned up) patch.
>
With this change, lock_free_aliases.cc fails test for excess errors:
Excess errors:
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:7:
error: #error "Feature test macro for lock-free type 
aliases is missing in <atomic>"
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:19:
error: 'atomic_signed_lock_free' is not a member of 'std'
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:19:
error: template argument 1 is invalid
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:20:
error: 'atomic_unsigned_lock_free' is not a member of 'std'
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:20:
error: template argument 1 is invalid
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:25:
error: 'atomic_signed_lock_free' is not a member of 'std'
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:25:
error: template argument 1 is invalid
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:26:
error: 'atomic_unsigned_lock_free' is not a member of 'std'
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:26:
error: template argument 1 is invalid
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:29:
error: 'atomic_signed_lock_free' is not a member of 'std'
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:29:
error: template argument 1 is invalid
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:30:
error: 'atomic_unsigned_lock_free' is not a member of 'std'
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:30:
error: template argument 1 is invalid
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:33:
error: 'std::atomic_signed_lock_free' has not been declared
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc:34:
error: 'std::atomic_unsigned_lock_free' has not been 
declared

This is with my posted cmath patch.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely <redi@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e162b2ff52c5e20f6624ff6b66845fe573cef183

commit r14-9371-ge162b2ff52c5e20f6624ff6b66845fe573cef183
Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon Feb 26 13:17:32 2024 +0000

    libstdc++: Do not define lock-free atomic aliases if not fully lock-free
[PR114103]

    The whole point of these typedefs is to guarantee lock-freedom, so if
    the target has no such types, we shouldn't defined the typedefs at all.

    libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:

            PR libstdc++/114103
            * include/bits/version.def (atomic_lock_free_type_aliases): Add
            extra_cond to check for at least one always-lock-free type.
            * include/bits/version.h: Regenerate.
            * include/std/atomic (atomic_signed_lock_free)
            (atomic_unsigned_lock_free): Only use always-lock-free types.
            * src/c++20/tzdb.cc (time_zone::_Impl::RulesCounter): Don't use
            atomic counter if lock-free aliases aren't available.
            * testsuite/29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc: XFAIL for
            targets without lock-free word-size compare_exchange.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think this should be fixed now.

[Bug libstdc++/114103] FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic/lock_free_aliases.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors)

[danglin at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114103

John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED

--- Comment #18 from John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.