[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #16 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Wed Jan 28 09:53:39 2015 New Revision: 220201 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220201&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2015-01-28 Richard Biener PR libstdc++/64798 * libsupc++/e

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- If _Unwind_Exception already uses it, sure. Sorry, didn't know that.

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 > > --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- I > think aligned attribute is similarly us

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek --- I think aligned attribute is similarly useless for this, I'd really go for testing alignments you need, rather than expecting some magic value. I'm not aware of any target that would have bigger alignment f

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 34593 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34593&action=edit further updated patch Ceases use of __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__.

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 > > --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- > __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__ has nothing to do wi

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek --- __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__ has nothing to do with alignment of malloc returned memory. The union I've mentioned is a reasonable guess (something actually mandated by the standard), glibc right now guarantees 2 *

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #34591|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 > > Jakub Jelinek changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- > Created attachment 34591 > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34591&action=edit > patch > > Ok, so it was bogus to assume siz

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 34591 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34591&action=edit patch Ok, so it was bogus to assume size_t would cover the largest alignment needed. Can test check the atta

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-26 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #1 from rguenther at suse dot de --- [...] > Does malloc return 8-byte aligned memory? Is __alignof__ It does, according to libc sources exactly for the case at hand: *

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-26 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-26 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #2 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, ro at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 > > > > Bug ID: 64798 > >

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-26 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 --- Comment #1 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, ro at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 > > Bug ID: 64798 >Summary: [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badal

[Bug libstdc++/64798] [5 regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C FAILs

2015-01-26 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64798 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0