public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
@ 2020-07-05 13:08 bouanto at zoho dot com
2020-07-06 10:53 ` [Bug jit/96067] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 more replies)
0 siblings, 6 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: bouanto at zoho dot com @ 2020-07-05 13:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
Bug ID: 96067
Summary: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead
of void
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: bouanto at zoho dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi.
The builtin __atomic_compare_exchange_n returns a void instead of bool.
Thanks to fix this issue.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug jit/96067] __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
@ 2020-07-06 10:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-07-06 12:13 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-07-06 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2020-07-06
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Antoni from comment #0)
> The builtin __atomic_compare_exchange_n returns a void instead of bool.
This is not a very useful bug report.
Do you have a testcase? Is this something specific to libgccjit?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug jit/96067] __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
2020-07-06 10:53 ` [Bug jit/96067] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-07-06 12:13 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
2020-07-06 12:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: bouanto at zoho dot com @ 2020-07-06 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
--- Comment #2 from Antoni <bouanto at zoho dot com> ---
Created attachment 48835
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48835&action=edit
Reproducer for thebug
Here's a reproducer for the bug.
The doc says it should return bool
(https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/_005f_005fatomic-Builtins.html), but this
reproducer shows the following error:
libgccjit.so: error: gcc_jit_block_end_with_return: mismatching types: return
of __atomic_compare_exchange_n ((&var), (&var), (int)0, (bool)0, (int)0,
(int)0) (type: void) in function hello (return type: bool)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug jit/96067] __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
2020-07-06 10:53 ` [Bug jit/96067] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-07-06 12:13 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
@ 2020-07-06 12:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-04 12:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-07-06 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug jit/96067] __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-06 12:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-04 12:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-18 1:06 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
2021-12-11 22:20 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-04 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug jit/96067] __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-04 12:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-18 1:06 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
2021-12-11 22:20 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: bouanto at zoho dot com @ 2021-05-18 1:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
Antoni <bouanto at zoho dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #4 from Antoni <bouanto at zoho dot com> ---
Closing in favor of 96066.
That should be using a number instead of `n` as in
`__atomic_compare_exchange_4`.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 96066 ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug jit/96067] __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-18 1:06 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
@ 2021-12-11 22:20 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-12-11 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96067
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Antoni Boucher <antoyo@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:611fdb0fc5b95ee15215e2e3679834f311919096
commit r12-5912-g611fdb0fc5b95ee15215e2e3679834f311919096
Author: Antoni Boucher <bouanto@zoho.com>
Date: Sat Dec 11 16:42:54 2021 -0500
libgccjit: Add support for types used by atomic builtins [PR96066]
[PR96067]
2021-12-11 Antoni Boucher <bouanto@zoho.com>
gcc/jit/
PR target/96066
PR target/96067
* jit-builtins.c: Implement missing types for builtins.
* jit-recording.c:: Allow sending a volatile const void * as
argument.
* jit-recording.h: New functions (is_volatile, is_const) and
allow comparing qualified types.
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/96066
PR target/96067
* jit.dg/all-non-failing-tests.h: Add test-builtin-types.c.
* jit.dg/test-builtin-types.c
* jit.dg/test-error-bad-assignment.c
* jit.dg/test-fuzzer.c: Add fuzzing for type qualifiers.
Signed-off-by: Antoni Boucher <bouanto@zoho.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-12-11 22:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-07-05 13:08 [Bug jit/96067] New: __atomic_compare_exchange_n should return bool instead of void bouanto at zoho dot com
2020-07-06 10:53 ` [Bug jit/96067] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-07-06 12:13 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
2020-07-06 12:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-04 12:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-18 1:06 ` bouanto at zoho dot com
2021-12-11 22:20 ` cvs-commit 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).