From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-436599-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15506 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2016 14:22:50 -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 15496 invoked by uid 89); 22 Sep 2016 14:22:49 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:618
X-HELO: mail-qk0-f174.google.com
Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com (HELO mail-qk0-f174.google.com) (209.85.220.174) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:22:39 +0000
Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id g67so17377554qkd.0        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:22:39 -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=2PZxC3n7C1gH5lKWXpTiIrN96TSq+MsHV1Cdb6d+TC8=;        b=FjWIPK//DuBYouamXrJGsCgc6wrUoPYZ/IL1J+nm9Z7c/dOzTLa4w64Yv3Bn/mz1Ps         NyMq7RnX2ji66h3T3MLknEutxUWTWK5LtpxHitZWLKMKStGe7xg73OdkJ0SnA/kGv4rO         qciVZXtwzfs5H02MLWxXMEofoMldyd5KmmoeDaMl/N5hja51DOyAxI25wRR3kklo1A76         ZuJfuNvKR2ely2DoKjZjkaqKw0+339Ols4mp+rSAPxe6vPANCGzkvOxguBEFmZJsnjUv         PwBio+dsubxwm4xUdZiOhysj6407ENaVihB2sXpCYBBT2/3XNsNM4kDk+c+36gcvnn/n         ODBg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RmnNMBZBoLwu/e5mJhLQ1Iy0UqL7sab/AbdjGwhg3c8W4Oglc5RWnCX4YsaDvVWt1dXDaW1FGGNkPHU7Vq4
X-Received: by 10.55.179.135 with SMTP id c129mr2381379qkf.98.1474554157989; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.21.80 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CADzB+2kJvkrkE-HgOBcRaT1ocN5MvJGb2_yxL4cJuHoySmZ5Nw@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>
From: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:26:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAKdteObhpKELUUbayzJLJmEnnJGp6QVE1yrg-8p2TniPY-Mshg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [C++ PATCH] Aligned new option handling fixes (PR c++/77651)
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
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/msg01562.txt.bz2

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)

Thanks,

Christophe