[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[paolo.carlini at oracle dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |milan.jurik at xylab dot cz

--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2011-03-19 21:56:49 UTC ---
*** Bug 48205 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-20 15:23:02 UTC ---
N.B. messages_base::catalog is required to be a typedef for int, although there
is an open issue which would allow intptr_t to be used instead:
http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/lwg-active.html#2028

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[alasdairrr at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

Alasdair Lumsden <alasdairrr at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |alasdairrr at gmail dot com

--- Comment #6 from Alasdair Lumsden <alasdairrr at gmail dot com> 2011-05-20 16:19:04 UTC ---
Hi There,

I'm project lead for OpenIndiana, the community continuation of OpenSolaris.

We currently build the whole OS using Sun Studio, which is closed source. We
are seriously investigating switching from Sun Studio, to GCC, in particular
4.5.3. However the lack of ieee 1003.1-2001 support is holding us back
committing to this.

Would the author of the patch be able to comment on the stability and
completeness of it? What work is outstanding? What would it take to complete
this work, and would the author of the patch be interested in completing this?
If so, is there anything our project could do to assist?

We can provide Solaris Zones (Both Solaris 10 and OpenIndiana ones) for
development on powerful Dual-Quad Core servers if this would be of benefit.

Many thanks!

Kind Regards,

Alasdair

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-05-20 17:27:45 UTC ---
Does OpenIndiana support the new POSIX.1-2008 APIs, e.g. wctype_l and
towupper_l?

If noone else does it I hope to get time to work on fixing the problems in the
current code, but it's not a high priority for me.

I think a better long term plan is to write a new locale model based on the
POSIX 2008 API, as that could be common to more platforms and would provide
thread-safety and the other advantages of the GNU/Linux code.

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[alasdairrr at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

--- Comment #8 from Alasdair Lumsden <alasdairrr at gmail dot com> 2011-05-23 13:44:16 UTC ---
Hi Jonathan,

(In reply to comment #7)
> Does OpenIndiana support the new POSIX.1-2008 APIs, e.g. wctype_l and
> towupper_l?

Not at present, however Garrett D'Amore has expressed interest in adding
support:

"illumos doesn't have the POSIX 2008 locale APIs.  I've considered adding
them... it would not be too difficult, although we would need to eliminate some
process global state ... are there applications that consume these?  If there
are, then its worth the time and effort."

Do you know if there are many apps using these APIs? If so I'll respond back to
him and see if we can get the ball rolling.

> If noone else does it I hope to get time to work on fixing the problems in the
> current code, but it's not a high priority for me.

Would a financial incentive help? My company may be interested in funding this
to speed up the work.

> I think a better long term plan is to write a new locale model based on the
> POSIX 2008 API, as that could be common to more platforms and would provide
> thread-safety and the other advantages of the GNU/Linux code.

Would this be a significant volume of work?

Cheers,

Alasdair

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-05-23 16:22:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Would a financial incentive help? My company may be interested in funding this
> to speed up the work.

I only work on libstdc++ in my spare time and I lack the time, not the
motivation :)

There are some others who expressed an interest in improving the locale code
for Darwin and they might be interested.  See the libstdc++ mailing list
archives for December 2010, January, February and May 2011 for various threads
on the subject.

> > I think a better long term plan is to write a new locale model based on the
> > POSIX 2008 API, as that could be common to more platforms and would provide
> > thread-safety and the other advantages of the GNU/Linux code.
> 
> Would this be a significant volume of work?

I don't *think* so, the GNU locale model already uses those APIs as they've
been in glibc for ages, so a good starting point would be copying the GNU code
and fixing it up a bit to replace anything GNU-specific with the POSIX.1-2008
equivalent. Someone already started doing that for Darwin earlier this month.

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[alasdairrr at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

--- Comment #10 from Alasdair Lumsden <alasdairrr at gmail dot com> 2011-05-23 18:36:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> I only work on libstdc++ in my spare time and I lack the time, not the
> motivation :)

Alrighty!

> There are some others who expressed an interest in improving the locale code
> for Darwin and they might be interested.  See the libstdc++ mailing list
> archives for December 2010, January, February and May 2011 for various threads
> on the subject.

I'll check this out, thanks for the info.

> > > I think a better long term plan is to write a new locale model based on the
> > > POSIX 2008 API, as that could be common to more platforms and would provide
> > > thread-safety and the other advantages of the GNU/Linux code.
> > 
> > Would this be a significant volume of work?
> 
> I don't *think* so, the GNU locale model already uses those APIs as they've
> been in glibc for ages, so a good starting point would be copying the GNU code
> and fixing it up a bit to replace anything GNU-specific with the POSIX.1-2008
> equivalent. Someone already started doing that for Darwin earlier this month.

Great, again thanks for the info. I'll make contact with the darwin folks.

Cheers,

Alasdair

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[vhaisman at gmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

Václav Zeman <vhaisman at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vhaisman at gmail dot com

--- Comment #11 from Václav Zeman <vhaisman at gmail dot com> ---
I have started working on this but I have never finished. If
anybody is interested, the work is available at
<https://github.com/wilx/gcc/compare/gcc-mirror:master...posix-2008-locale>.
The branch is a bit misnamed because I had to use some Darwin extensions
instead of only POSIX 2008 functions.
>From gcc-bugs-return-458673-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Aug 17 23:19:36 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-458673-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 31269 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2014 23:19:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 31204 invoked by uid 48); 17 Aug 2014 23:19:23 -0000
From: "kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/62111] ICE when building Linux kernel for sh64
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 23:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-62111-4-MaH6gkEmS9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-62111-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-62111-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg01170.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2205

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idb111

Kazumoto Kojima <kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Kazumoto Kojima <kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'm trying to find out what is going on.
Here is a part of RTL dump for the test case before reload:

(insn 6 5 9 2 (set (reg:DI 160 [ D.1463 ])
        (mem/c:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 166)
                (const_int 8 [0x8])) [2 empty_zero_page+8 S8 A64])) xxx.c:15
282 {*movdi_media_nofpu}
     (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (mem/c:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 166)
                (const_int 8 [0x8])) [2 empty_zero_page+8 S8 A64])
        (nil)))
(insn 9 6 28 2 (set (reg:SI 169 [ D.1464 ])
        (zero_extend:SI (truncate:HI (reg:DI 160 [ D.1463 ])))) xxx.c:15 226
{*zero_extendhisi2_media}
     (nil))

and reload combines these two insns into the insn

(insn 9 6 28 2 (set (reg:SI 2 r2 [orig:169 D.1464 ] [169])
        (zero_extend:SI (truncate:HI (mem/c:DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 10 r10 [166])
                        (const_int 8 [0x8])) [2 empty_zero_page+8 S8 A64]))))
xxx.c:15 226 {*zero_extendhisi2_media}
     (nil))

which results this ICE.  It looks that reload recognizes the last
insn is a valid *zero_extendhisi2_media insn:

(define_insn "*zero_extendhisi2_media"
  [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=r,r")
    (zero_extend:SI (match_operand:HI 1 "general_extend_operand" "r,m")))]
...

even though general_extend_operand doesn't permit (truncate (mem ...)).
An easy workaround might be to disable truncate in general_extend_operand
before reload.

--- gcc/config/sh/predicates.md.orig    2014-08-02 11:55:29.228875715 +0900
+++ gcc/config/sh/predicates.md    2014-08-17 08:30:20.439326569 +0900
@@ -398,7 +398,7 @@
 (define_predicate "general_extend_operand"
   (match_code "subreg,reg,mem,truncate")
 {
-  if (GET_CODE (op) == TRUNCATE)
+  if (reload_completed && GET_CODE (op) == TRUNCATE)
     return arith_operand (op, mode);

   if (MEM_P (op) || (GET_CODE (op) == SUBREG && MEM_P (SUBREG_REG (op))))

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> N.B. messages_base::catalog is required to be a typedef for int, although
> there is an open issue which would allow intptr_t to be used instead:
> http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/lwg-active.html#2028

That was resolved to make it an unspecified integer type:
https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2028

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[ro at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-10-02 17:47 -------
Created an attachment (id=18695)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18695&action=view)
libstdc++ testsuite log (both 32 and 64 bit) on Solaris 10/x86 with initial
patch


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[ro at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-10-02 17:45 -------
Initial patch to get it to compile here:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2009-10/msg00008.html


-- 

ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2009-10-02 17:45:59
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495

[Bug libstdc++/41495] libstdc++ --enable-clocale=ieee_1003.1-2001 fails

[ro at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-09-29 18:09 -------
Testing the trivial fix on Solaris 10/x86 to see how far this gets me.


-- 

ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ro at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41495