Re: [PATCH v3] libstdc++: fix pointer type exception catch [PR105387]

[Jakob Hasse <jakob.hasse@espressif.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2568 bytes --]

Hello, is there any update regarding the patch PR105387 for bug 105387? We've been waiting for some time now, but the bugzilla bug is still open: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105387. If there is any issue with the patch (besides the ones we discussed before), please let us know. If there's no chance to integrate that patch, we would also like to know, to make decisions on how to handle the patch internally.

Thanks, and All the Best,
Jakob Hasse
________________________________
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2022 5:18 PM
To: Jakob Hasse <jakob.hasse@espressif.com>
Cc: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Anton Maklakov <anton.maklakov@espressif.com>; Ivan Grokhotkov <ivan@espressif.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] libstdc++: fix pointer type exception catch [PR105387]

[External: This email originated outside Espressif]

On Wed, 25 May 2022 at 03:30, Jakob Hasse via Libstdc++
<libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> two weeks ago I submitted the second version of the patch PR105387 for the bug 105387. Now I added a pointer-to-member exception test just to make sure that it doesn't break in case RTTI is enabled. The test is disabled if RTTI is disabled. I didn't receive any feedback so far regarding the second version of the patch. Is there any issue preventing acceptance?

Just a lack of time to review it properly.

It's on my list.


>
> I ran the conformance tests on libstdc++v3 by running
> make -j 18 check RUNTESTFLAGS=conformance.exp
>
> Results for the current version (only difference is the added pointer-to-member test):
>
> Without RTTI before applying patch:
> === libstdc++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 14560
> # of unexpected failures 5
> # of expected failures 95
> # of unsupported tests 702
>
> Without RTTI after applying patch:
> === libstdc++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 14562
> # of unexpected failures 5
> # of expected failures 95
> # of unsupported tests 703
>
> With RTTI before applying patch:
> === libstdc++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 14598
> # of unexpected failures 2
> # of expected failures 95
> # of unsupported tests 683
>
> With RTTI after applying patch:
> === libstdc++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 14602
> # of unexpected failures 2
> # of expected failures 95
> # of unsupported tests 683
>
> Given that the pointer-to-member test is disabled when RTTI is disabled, the results look logical to me.
>