From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-436735-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 102203 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2016 14:37:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 102172 invoked by uid 89); 23 Sep 2016 14:37:16 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:722, H*F:U*jason
X-HELO: mail-oi0-f50.google.com
Received: from mail-oi0-f50.google.com (HELO mail-oi0-f50.google.com) (209.85.218.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 14:37:06 +0000
Received: by mail-oi0-f50.google.com with SMTP id w11so136436762oia.2        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date         :message-id:subject:to:cc;        bh=v9VmKGKdkBZqg/7mCn2OBrIgjySHw/2fOPJlFa8KCcM=;        b=CsFdZNfdfto/4dA6WUrzWt16a/Ux8ksIqWZB/uKTa/TZVGlEtWWhG8w3WgT6ykYklJ         IT0wdclo0oEbTRcf1ke1tWv+uiiI5mfpu+QGPGva0UfDVeVOjNxUsMyhv4eO+1ZYFp1K         h8CKEVxRDY92yRbmOtorEVnGLUCitrIU6SUCOQp77T52rBMi+y6RI4BVtt5WoDZ2tTt4         74gpx9Z4OHF7XEVnvRZlyCDC5knwCK3fXJvUa9weom6A57gqMjljKheUseQ3aRL7fgfX         ii9BQCyQBhPXZTdZDIiNVagNRk0GAFJF2Hw90Fs4P9S/uc+RpckWFWxEEUZHBJ5TspSK         U56A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwNEvXe1jWtV4wFa2a+jJh8nvpEgmFOJjmOwlEfhaKBZZ0kh027jqgKF2K1yy8iJDegdhMLQFAC5VWDLXFkM
X-Received: by 10.202.236.66 with SMTP id k63mr10517763oih.127.1474641424316; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:37:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.105.167 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKdteObhpKELUUbayzJLJmEnnJGp6QVE1yrg-8p2TniPY-Mshg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160921144607.GA7282@tucnak.redhat.com> <CADzB+2mfw2kaBnCKUcRzWPiLfDWL3SYamAgzSn=DXa5_6CDDpA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKdteOY2By7jL5n4zMFSNwzCYhO4nXY2ejbCajK2Grwk2pDfqg@mail.gmail.com> <CADzB+2kJvkrkE-HgOBcRaT1ocN5MvJGb2_yxL4cJuHoySmZ5Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKdteObhpKELUUbayzJLJmEnnJGp6QVE1yrg-8p2TniPY-Mshg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 14:43:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CADzB+2kxiZBR-y7fHn8tcasi4SqW-pLENKWk8cuEfGk_PUHemg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [C++ PATCH] Aligned new option handling fixes (PR c++/77651)
To: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-09/txt/msg01698.txt.bz2

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Christophe Lyon
<christophe.lyon@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 22 September 2016 at 15:01, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:58 AM, Christophe Lyon
>> <christophe.lyon@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> This new test (aligned-new6.C) fails on arm/aarch64 bare-metal targets
>>> (using newlib):
>>> arm-none-eabi/./libstdc++-v3/src/.libs/libstdc++.a(new_opa.o): In
>>> function `operator new(unsigned int, std::align_val_t)':
>>> /gccsrc/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opa.cc:76: undefined reference to
>>> `aligned_alloc'
>>
>> Hmm, does this fix that?
>
> Yes. (I tested on arm only)

Great, applied.

Jason