From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 120459 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2018 11:19:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 120427 invoked by uid 89); 26 Jul 2018 11:19:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:786 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:19:05 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0B8577015; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.33.36.95]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BD802156701; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:19:02 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:19:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Wakely To: Rainer Orth Cc: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/70940 optimize pmr::resource_adaptor for allocators using malloc Message-ID: <20180726111902.GH14057@redhat.com> References: <20180723194020.GA13044@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) X-SW-Source: 2018-07/txt/msg01626.txt.bz2 On 26/07/18 13:11 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: >Hi Jonathan, > >> Rainer, this is another place where alignof(max_align_t) gets encoded >> into the ABI, so is affected by PR 77691 as well. > >indeed, fixed by the following patch. Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11, >ok for mainline? OK, thanks. >The ugly thing about xfailing the affected tests is that they will XPASS >once in a while when malloc happens to return 16-byte aligned memory. >However, I'm reluctant to skip them instead at least while there's a >chance that Solaris will fix 32-bit x86 malloc alignment post Solaris >11.4. Yes, it isn't ideal to have them flip between XFAIL and XPASS, but I agree that simply skipping them is worse.