This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

libstdc++ abi-check failing on x86-linux


Between revision 132433 and 132439 (that is, 132433 was good, 132439 was not), the regression tester started to see

2 incompatible symbols
0
_ZSt13__check_facetISt7codecvtIcc11__mbstate_tEERKT_PS4_
std::codecvt<char, char, __mbstate_t> const& std::__check_facet<std::codecvt<char, char, __mbstate_t> >(std::codecvt<char, char, __mbstate_t> const*)
version status: incompatible
GLIBCXX_3.4
type: function
status: added



1
_ZSt13__check_facetISt7codecvtIwc11__mbstate_tEERKT_PS4_
std::codecvt<wchar_t, char, __mbstate_t> const& std::__check_facet<std::codecvt<wchar_t, char, __mbstate_t> >(std::codecvt<wchar_t, char, __mbstate_t> const*)
version status: incompatible
GLIBCXX_3.4
type: function
status: added




=== libstdc++-v3 check-abi Summary ===

# of added symbols:		 134
# of missing symbols:		 0
# of incompatible symbols:	 2

using: baseline_symbols.txt
FAIL: abi_check

Now, there was only one change between these revisions, which was:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r132439 | hubicka | 2008-02-19 09:09:42 -0800 (Tue, 19 Feb 2008) | 4 lines



PR middle-end/28779
* tree-inline.c (estimate_num_insns_1): Fix counting of cost of call_expr.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

so I think what's happened is that inlining has changed and so this function isn't inlined any more. It doesn't seem that simply not inlining a function should cause testcase failures; is the ELF symbol versioning especially fragile in the face of inlining changes?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]