From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x434.google.com (mail-pf1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::434]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 894143851C3D for ; Wed, 5 May 2021 07:20:58 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 894143851C3D Received: by mail-pf1-x434.google.com with SMTP id i190so1306137pfc.12 for ; Wed, 05 May 2021 00:20:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=6ndTIiMNi8qqUUu5cziKQAt0ye83lE03qjp55bqgMn4=; b=rqI1azLRSSK7kfT5D0kVCa3dRVdlQM+u0b8X1U4e7E/uIcBjQkDUw2m8fuuXUGvfKf /p2yI1heu2Iw3Y23+TX48KI4+sBtpIPnDP6BVnkIB2IieK0D/QOBn3cZgdxUC0JnRIro m4wiSMpSCf22bMwcYjq25F+og1AbbjTKgVQMNB/VEoQhm3A648+GiMRj2CHhIt+4fvHV e43huZA3oA8pXGIaf/HcJX2aza59W3syLH6tTggmFfJOKrIuXdN3MrEj7nZV8viq4tGD KiXgyafMi8P2wmOjFqR2euVxqXeYHpaeB6UNb0q9W2N+/eyB++YEJ1ntCvocz/hvATCc 4rwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533iI78cYNdPNFjGkehZr8HYlU0mp/omkka/BzkqD0KJAxRwCTVb a3Lg+G6I3ZKq2MUbIuswHJ8XRRz/eQKV47pC X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyeBBXPteCHjowc04c+AKJzkcBkTX9V43i9lPIkFF2OwRJwsY6e175EuLZBuQuAUJG0vKfIHg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:883:b029:247:562:f8f9 with SMTP id q3-20020a056a000883b02902470562f8f9mr26875408pfj.34.1620199257123; Wed, 05 May 2021 00:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org ([2406:3400:51d:8cc0:6de1:aeb8:8414:f7a4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k10sm13772414pff.140.2021.05.05.00.20.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 May 2021 00:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E50E741A08; Wed, 5 May 2021 16:50:52 +0930 (ACST) Date: Wed, 5 May 2021 16:50:52 +0930 From: Alan Modra To: Iain Sandoe Cc: Nick Clifton , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, "H.J. Lu" Subject: Re: RFC: Changing AC_PROG_CC to AC_PROG_CC_C99 in top level configure Message-ID: <20210505072052.GA14297@bubble.grove.modra.org> References: <8c1b0ed9-e6f3-9c22-45c5-c2680a2a4830@polymtl.ca> <3e562764-ce93-d4a2-fbba-dc622c9b5bb7@redhat.com> <3c76d8a1-d029-237d-054c-0ff65eb063cb@polymtl.ca> <20210505001825.GN22624@bubble.grove.modra.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3039.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, GIT_PATCH_0, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 May 2021 07:21:00 -0000 On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 08:05:29AM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote: > Alan Modra via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > On 2021-05-04 8:42 a.m., Nick Clifton wrote: > > > Hi Guys, > > > > > > On 4/30/21 7:36 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > > > > I think this fix is obvious enough, I encourage you to push it, > > > > > > OK - I have pushed the patch to the mainline branches of both > > > the gcc and binutils-gdb repositories. > > > > Thanks Nick! Incidentally, I checked the AC_PROG_CC_C99 change on > > both binutils and gcc mainline using gcc-4.9. > > > > To build gcc on x86_64 I found the following patch necessary to avoid > > lots of > > error: uninitialized const member ‘stringop_algs::stringop_strategy::max’ > > error: uninitialized const member ‘stringop_algs::stringop_strategy::alg’ > > when compiling config/i386/i386-options.c. These can't be cured by > > configuring with --disable-stage1-checking. > > > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.h b/gcc/config/i386/i386.h > > index 97d6f3863cb..cc3b1b6d666 100644 > > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.h > > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.h > > @@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ struct stringop_algs > > { > > const enum stringop_alg unknown_size; > > const struct stringop_strategy { > > - const int max; > > - const enum stringop_alg alg; > > + int max; > > + enum stringop_alg alg; > > int noalign; > > } size [MAX_STRINGOP_ALGS]; > > }; > > does this relate to / fix PR 100246 (which seems to fire for some GCC > versions as well > as older clang)? Yes, looks like the same issue. I started making a similar fix to the one you attached to the PR, then laziness kicked in after noticing the errors were only given on the const elements. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM