[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #15 from Adrian Bunk --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #11) > RFC draft patch – also to solve an offload problem with atomic and nvptx > libgomp: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/556297.html > See

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jeffrey Walton from comment #13) > Add a mee too. When using sanitizers, like -fsanitize=undefined, the > compiler driver is not adding the necessary libraries to link the program. That's a

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #13 from Jeffrey Walton --- Add a mee too. When using sanitizers, like -fsanitize=undefined, the compiler driver is not adding the necessary libraries to link the program. Ugh...

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com ---

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab --- All these failure modes can already be observed on riscv-linux, where -pthread implies -latomic.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I should also note the testsuite point I mentioned in the BoF, and related points about building target libraries, which mean this is more complicated than just the driver specs change:

Re: [Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

I should also note the testsuite point I mentioned in the BoF, and related points about building target libraries, which mean this is more complicated than just the driver specs change: There is testsuite logic (see gcc/testsuite/lib/atomic-dg.exp) to locate libatomic for build-tree testing

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #8 from Andreas Schwab --- See also bug 84568 and bug 86005.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #7 from Joseph S. Myers --- This came up in the RISC-V BoF today.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- The design of what's in separate libraries is historical; since it probably predates shared libraries, the reason isn't obvious (with shared libraries, before --as-needed, it avoided

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #5 from Jeff Hammond --- Indeed, _Atomic is a language keyword and doesn't require any headers (the inclusion of stdatomic.h in this code is superfluous), so the "header->explicit library" argument doesn't apply. In any case, I do

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- In the libm case, POSIX has an explicit list of headers whose functions may require particular libraries to be linked in. libatomic is required for use of language features without any

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- See what I said in - I think linking --as-needed -latomic --no-as-needed makes sense by default when --as-needed is supported.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- That doesn't mean that the mistake should be repeated.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- That seems similar to using sqrt, which requires explicitly linking with libm.

[Bug driver/81358] libatomic not automatically linked with C11 code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81358 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||link-failure