From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29236 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2013 03:23:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 29206 invoked by uid 48); 29 Aug 2013 03:23:24 -0000 From: "rohan at rohanlean dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/58267] New: Alignment specifier allowed within array declarator; Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 03:23:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rohan at rohanlean dot de X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED 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_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter Message-ID: 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 X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg01510.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D58267 Bug ID: 58267 Summary: Alignment specifier allowed within array declarator; Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: rohan at rohanlean dot de =E2=80=9Cchar s[_Alignas (int) 7];=E2=80=9D is accepted without warnings in= strict C11 mode. I cannot construct that declaration using the grammar in appendix A.2 of the standard. >>From gcc-bugs-return-428587-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu Aug 29 06:41:24 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15967 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2013 06:41:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15917 invoked by uid 48); 29 Aug 2013 06:41:20 -0000 From: "kcc at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug sanitizer/57316] [4.8/4.9 regression] build failure in libsanitizer Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 06:41:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: sanitizer X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: kcc at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.2 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: 2013-08/txt/msg01511.txt.bz2 Content-length: 480 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316 --- Comment #6 from Kostya Serebryany --- > Would a fallback implementation of BlockingMutex::{Lock,Unlock}() that uses > pthread_mutex_*() be sensible here? That would be non-trivial. We intercept the pthread_ functions so we can't call them directly. We'll at least need to bypass our own interceptors. And as I mentioned before, older kernels will likely not work anyway for a few other reasons.