[Bug tree-optimization/90021] [9 Regression] ICE in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 since r270203
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90021 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- Suppose Bin will handle this.
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|--- |7.5
[Bug c++/90019] [8 regression] Bogus ambiguous overload error for NTTP pack of disjoint enable_ifs unless there is an unsupplied default argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90019 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Known to work||7.4.0, 9.0 Version|9.0 |8.3.0 Keywords||rejects-valid Last reconfirmed||2019-04-09 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Target Milestone|--- |8.4 Known to fail||8.1.0, 8.3.0 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- Also seems to work on trunk, but it seems it was only fixed recently. So maybe this one has a duplicate.
[Bug tree-optimization/90018] [8/9 Regression] r265453 miscompiled 527.cam4_r in SPEC CPU 2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018 --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- > Martin, if you can help with a testcase that would be great (in case you > have a working setup / methology to track this down). Otherwise I'll of > course see to do that myself. I'll do it for you.
[Bug tree-optimization/90018] [8/9 Regression] r265453 miscompiled 527.cam4_r in SPEC CPU 2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Priority|P3 |P2 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Known to work||8.2.0, 9.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|[8 Regression] r265453 |[8/9 Regression] r265453 |miscompiled 527.cam4_r in |miscompiled 527.cam4_r in |SPEC CPU 2017 |SPEC CPU 2017 Known to fail||8.3.0 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Mine. Even though the issue doesn't appear on trunk the referenced revision doesn't fix a bug but a missed optimization so the issue must be latent on trunk. Martin, if you can help with a testcase that would be great (in case you have a working setup / methology to track this down). Otherwise I'll of course see to do that myself.
[Bug bootstrap/89864] [9 regression] gcc fails to build/bootstrap with XCode 10.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864 --- Comment #43 from Iain Sandoe --- Created attachment 46110 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46110=edit Proof-of-principle path Does this work for you? - my local testing says it generates the right wrapped include file. (perhaps the constraint on darwin version was too tight in Erik's case)
[Bug c++/90010] [8/9 Regression] valgrind error with snprintf and -Wall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90010 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Priority|P3 |P2
[Bug target/88834] [SVE] Poor addressing mode choices for LD2 and ST2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88834 --- Comment #16 from Wilco --- (In reply to kugan from comment #15) > (In reply to Wilco from comment #11) > > There is also something odd with the way the loop iterates, this doesn't > > look right: > > > > whilelo p0.s, x3, x4 > > incwx3 > > ptest p1, p0.b > > bne .L3 > > I am not sure I understand this. I tried with qemu using an execution > testcase and It seems to work. > > whilelo p0.s, x4, x5 > incwx4 > ptest p1, p0.b > bne .L3 > In my case I have the above (register allocation difference only) incw is > correct considering two vector word registers? Am I missing something here? I'm talking about the completely redundant ptest, where does that come from?
[Bug c++/89900] [9 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault (in check_instantiated_arg)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89900
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priority|P4 |P1
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
Uhm, unfortunately a tiny modification of the original testcase uncovers an ICE
on valid:
template void
fk (XE..., int/*SW*/);
void
w9 (void)
{
fk (0);
}
[Bug tree-optimization/90021] [9 Regression] ICE in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 since r270203
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90021
--- Comment #2 from bin cheng ---
We have {{0, +, 1}_6, +, 1}_4 in this case, and _6 is an outer loop of
loop_nest. Function add_multivariate_self_dist was intentionally skipped in
PR89725 patch, but control flow gets to it because
1) In analyze_miv_subscript, equal access_fn case is specially handled,
rather than general miv analysis.
2) In add_other_self_distances, evolution_function_is_univariate_p returns
false for above access_fn.
It looks we can also introduce another parameter loopnum to
evolution_function_is_univariate_p, just like
evolution_function_is_affine_multivariate_p to consider outer loop's chrec as
invariant symbol here. OTOH, making changes in add_multivariate_self_dist
still doesn't seem right in this case.
[Bug tree-optimization/46590] long compile time with -O2 and many loops
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46590 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #55 from Martin Liška --- Just for the record, it improved significantly compile time of test-cases provided in PR69609, PR38518, PR36262: https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/CPP/graph?plot.0=11.603.8 https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/CPP/graph?plot.0=11.618.8 https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/CPP/graph?plot.0=11.630.8
[Bug c++/90010] [8/9 Regression] valgrind error with snprintf and -Wall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90010 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-04-09 CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org, ||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Known to work||7.3.0 Target Milestone|--- |8.4 Summary|valgrind error with |[8/9 Regression] valgrind |snprintf and -Wall |error with snprintf and ||-Wall Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail||8.3.0, 9.0 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Confirmed, started with r247401.
[Bug preprocessor/64965] __FILE__ doesn't work if the filename contains newline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64965 Rasmus Villemoes changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Rasmus Villemoes --- Fixed by r253605
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 --- Comment #6 from Martin Liška --- I bisected GCC 4.9.x branch and it started with r215059, which is a backport of 3 patches. I reverted changes in: patching file gcc/recog.c patching file gcc/tree-ssa-loop-niter.c patching file gcc/tree-vect-slp.c and so that it points to backport of PR61672.
[Bug gcov-profile/90023] The coverage of a label is incorrect when it is after a return statement and followed by a blank statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90023 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-04-09 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- Confirmed, but again it's very low priority as it contains an empty basic block.
[Bug tree-optimization/90018] [8 Regression] r265453 miscompiled 527.cam4_r in SPEC CPU 2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90018 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Richi do you want a help with a test-case reduction? Or is it a known issue that has been fixed on trunk?
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška --- Created attachment 46109 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46109=edit Reduced test-case #1
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|[8 regression] -O2 -Os |[7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os |x86-64 wrong code generated |x86-64 wrong code generated |for GNU Emacs |for GNU Emacs Known to fail||7.4.0, 8.3.0, 9.0 --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- I can confirm that even though the code is not so nice :) I have 2 versions of the reduced test-case: 1) $ gcc emacs0.c -Os -fno-strict-aliasing -g && valgrind ./a.out ==20746== Memcheck, a memory error detector ==20746== Copyright (C) 2002-2017, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. ==20746== Using Valgrind-3.14.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info ==20746== Command: ./a.out ==20746== ==20746== Invalid read of size 8 ==20746==at 0x4011CF: select_window (emacs0.c:116) ==20746==by 0x40105A: main (emacs0.c:126) ==20746== Address 0xa is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd fails for 4.8.0+ except 4.9.x releases. 2) $ gcc emacs.c -Os -fno-strict-aliasing && ./a.out started failing with r238242 The problematic transformation: [local count: 1073741824]: _1 = PSEUDOVECTORP (window_6(D)); pretmp_9 = MEM[(struct window *)window_6(D)].contents; if (_1 != 0) goto ; [50.00%] else goto ; [50.00%] happens in PRE. Richi can you please take a look?
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [7/8/9 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 --- Comment #4 from Martin Liška --- Created attachment 46108 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46108=edit Reduced test-case #0
[Bug gcov-profile/90023] New: The coverage of a label is incorrect when it is after a return statement and followed by a blank statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90023
Bug ID: 90023
Summary: The coverage of a label is incorrect when it is after
a return statement and followed by a blank statement
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: gcov-profile
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: yangyibiao at nju dot edu.cn
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/8/lto-wrapper
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu
8.2.0-1ubuntu2~18.04' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-8/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++,go,brig,d,fortran,objc,obj-c++ --prefix=/usr
--with-gcc-major-version-only --program-suffix=-8
--program-prefix=x86_64-linux-gnu- --enable-shared --enable-linker-build-id
--libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix
--libdir=/usr/lib --enable-nls --with-sysroot=/ --enable-clocale=gnu
--enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes
--with-default-libstdcxx-abi=new --enable-gnu-unique-object
--disable-vtable-verify --enable-libmpx --enable-plugin --enable-default-pie
--with-system-zlib --with-target-system-zlib --enable-objc-gc=auto
--enable-multiarch --disable-werror --with-arch-32=i686 --with-abi=m64
--with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32 --enable-multilib --with-tune=generic
--enable-offload-targets=nvptx-none --without-cuda-driver
--enable-checking=release --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-linux-gnu
--target=x86_64-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.2.0 (Ubuntu 8.2.0-1ubuntu2~18.04)
$ cat small.c
#include
int foo(int a)
{
void *l = &
if(a == 4)
; //goto *l;
return 150;
error:
;// return a;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf("value: %d\n", foo(argc));
return 0;
}
$ gcc -w --coverage small.c; ./a.out; gcov-8 small.c; cat small.c.gcov
value: 150
File 'small.c'
Lines executed:100.00% of 7
Creating 'small.c.gcov'
-:0:Source:small.c
-:0:Graph:small.gcno
-:0:Data:small.gcda
-:0:Runs:1
-:0:Programs:1
-:1:#include
-:2:
1:3:int foo(int a)
-:4:{
1:5: void *l = &
-:6:
-:7: if(a == 4)
-:8:; //goto *l;
-:9:
2: 10: return 150;
-: 11:
1: 12:error:
-: 13:;// return a;
-: 14:}
-: 15:
1: 16:int main(int argc, char **argv)
-: 17:{
1: 18: printf("value: %d\n", foo(argc));
-: 19:
1: 20: return 0;
-: 21:}
Line #12 is wrongly marked as executed and Line #10 is wrongly marked as
executed twice.
When, Line #8 and Line #13 are not commented, the coverage is correct as:
-:0:Source:small.c
-:0:Graph:small.gcno
-:0:Data:small.gcda
-:0:Runs:1
-:0:Programs:1
-:1:#include
-:2:
1:3:int foo(int a)
-:4:{
1:5: void *l = &
-:6:
1:7: if(a == 4)
#:8:goto *l;
-:9:
1: 10: return 150;
-: 11:
#: 12:error:
#: 13: return a;
-: 14:}
-: 15:
1: 16:int main(int argc, char **argv)
-: 17:{
1: 18: printf("value: %d\n", foo(argc));
-: 19:
1: 20: return 0;
-: 21:}
[Bug bootstrap/89864] [9 regression] gcc fails to build/bootstrap with XCode 10.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864 --- Comment #42 from Jürgen Reuter --- I filed an APPLE bug report: https://bugreport.apple.com/web/?problemID=49727047
[Bug target/90015] riscv: typo "intterupt" in diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90015 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed on the trunk.
[Bug ipa/89893] Segmentation fault always occurs when node app is generated by gcc-8-branch@268745
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89893 --- Comment #34 from Martin Liška --- > It seems your solution works. But it doesn't work if I add > "-fno-strict-aliasing" through 'export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -O3 > -fno-strict-aliasing..." export CXXFLAGS="$CXXFLAGS -O3 > -fno-strict-aliasing..." ...', maybe they are overridden. Thank you very > much for your help. Please consult questions about nodejs build system with their developers.
[Bug ipa/89893] Segmentation fault always occurs when node app is generated by gcc-8-branch@268745
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89893
--- Comment #33 from 康 珊 ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #32)
> I can confirm it works for me with:
>
> diff --git a/common.gypi b/common.gypi
> index 9502e92..3d8f04f 100644
> --- a/common.gypi
> +++ b/common.gypi
> @@ -195,8 +195,8 @@
> 'ldflags': ['<(pgo_use)'],
>},],
>['enable_lto=="true"', {
> -'cflags': ['<(lto)'],
> -'ldflags': ['<(lto)'],
> +'cflags': ['<(lto) -fno-strict-aliasing'],
> +'ldflags': ['<(lto) -fno-strict-aliasing'],
>},],
> ],
>},],
It seems your solution works. But it doesn't work if I add
"-fno-strict-aliasing" through 'export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -O3
-fno-strict-aliasing..." export CXXFLAGS="$CXXFLAGS -O3
-fno-strict-aliasing..." ...', maybe they are overridden. Thank you very much
for your help.
[Bug fortran/90022] Issue with CFI_is_contigous and CFI base address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90022 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-04-09 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas --- I will be submitting a patch for this shortly. Paul
[Bug fortran/90022] New: Issue with CFI_is_contigous and CFI base address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90022 Bug ID: 90022 Summary: Issue with CFI_is_contigous and CFI base address Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: pault at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: pault at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-04/msg00013.html for the issue and a testcase. Paul
[Bug tree-optimization/90020] [8 regression] -O2 -Os x86-64 wrong code generated for GNU Emacs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90020 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2019-04-09 CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Let me take a look.
[Bug target/90015] riscv: typo "intterupt" in diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90015 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Tue Apr 9 06:38:07 2019 New Revision: 270221 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270221=gcc=rev Log: PR target/90015 * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_get_interrupt_type): Fix comment typo. (riscv_merge_decl_attributes): Fix typo in diagnostics. Remove trailing period from it too. * gcc.target/riscv/interrupt-conflict-mode.c (foo): Adjust expected diagnostics. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/interrupt-conflict-mode.c
[Bug tree-optimization/90021] [9 Regression] ICE in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 since r270203
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90021 --- Comment #1 from bin cheng --- Sorry for the breakage, I will have a look.
[Bug tree-optimization/90021] [9 Regression] ICE in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 since r270203
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90021 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Last reconfirmed||2019-4-9 CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org Known to work||8.3.0 Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Known to fail||9.0
[Bug tree-optimization/90021] New: [9 Regression] ICE in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 since r270203
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90021 Bug ID: 90021 Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 since r270203 Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- I see following ICE: $ cat ice.f90 MODULE a INTEGER b CONTAINS SUBROUTINE bar(c) REAL c(1) INTEGER d, e, f DO g = 1,3 DO f = 1,1 DO e = 1,3 DO d = 1,1 c(f-1+d) = c(f-1+d)*b END DO END DO END DO END DO END END $ gcc ice.f90 -fno-tree-loop-ivcanon -O1 -floop-interchange -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-ch -fipa-pta -c ice.f90:7:7: 7 | DO g = 1,3 | 1 Warning: Deleted feature: Loop variable at (1) must be integer during GIMPLE pass: linterchange ice.f90:4:0: 4 | SUBROUTINE bar(c) | internal compiler error: in index_in_loop_nest, at tree-data-ref.h:587 0x78219b index_in_loop_nest /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.h:587 0x7837a7 index_in_loop_nest /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree.h:3176 0x7837a7 add_multivariate_self_dist /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.c:4392 0x7837a7 add_other_self_distances /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.c:4445 0x7837a7 build_classic_dist_vector /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.c:4565 0x7837a7 subscript_dependence_tester /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.c:4798 0x7837a7 compute_affine_dependence(data_dependence_relation*, loop*) /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/tree-data-ref.c:4853 0x156cf48 tree_loop_interchange_compute_ddrs /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc:1855 0x156cf48 prepare_perfect_loop_nest /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc:2031 0x156cf48 execute /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc:2072 0x156cf48 execute /home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/gimple-loop-interchange.cc:2060
[Bug d/90013] wrong quotes in diagnostics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90013 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw --- It was the fault of the pot generator (well me I guess) that these sources got picked up in the first place. They are no longer part of gcc.pot. I don't know how this gets merged into each individual .po, but they should not be present anymore.
[Bug d/90012] untranslateable placeholder in expressionsem.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90012 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw --- It was the fault of the pot generator (well me I guess) that these sources got picked up in the first place. They are no longer part of gcc.pot. I don't know how this gets merged into each individual .po, but they should not be present anymore.
[Bug bootstrap/89864] [9 regression] gcc fails to build/bootstrap with XCode 10.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89864 --- Comment #41 from Iain Sandoe --- inconclusive so far, it's agreed that _Atomic is not a C++ keyword, but not clear what is best solution to the SDK use. If you filed a radar, please copy the number here (no-one else can see it, but at least we can point the Apple devs to it - so they can look internally).
