GCC 11.1 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

Thomas Rodgers rodgert@appliantology.com
Wed Apr 21 00:37:46 GMT 2021


On 2021-04-20 17:23, Thomas Rodgers wrote:

> On 2021-04-20 17:09, David Edelsohn wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 7:52 PM Thomas Rodgers
> <rodgert@appliantology.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2021-04-20 15:25, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 12:43 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc 
> <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> The first release candidate for GCC 11.1 is available from
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.1.0-RC-20210420/
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.1.0-RC-20210420
> 
> and shortly its mirrors.  It has been generated from git revision
> r11-8265-g246abba01f302eb453475b650ba839ec905be76d.
> 
> I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
> x86_64-linux and i686-linux.  Please test it and report any issues to
> bugzilla.
> 
> If all goes well, I'd like to release 11.1 on Tuesday, April 27th.
> 
> As I have reported in Bugzilla, the last minute
> 
> libstdc++: Refactor/cleanup of C++20 atomic wait implementation
> 
> has severely regressed libstdc++ on AIX due to changes to
> bits/semaphore_base.h header.
> 
> - David
> 
> I posted a patch to BZ that should disable <semaphore> entirely for AIX 
> (and other targets where there's not a supported implementation 
> strategy).
> 
> This patch isn't the best way of addressing this for a variety of 
> reasons, but this support is intended as experimental for GCC11 anyway. 
> Unfortunately I can't test it on AIX because it would seem that my ssh 
> keys never landed on the AIX cfarm machines.
> I am testing the patch on an AIX system inside IBM.
> 
> But it seems that you are disabling semaphore entirely on AIX, which
> is an unnecessary regression.  AIX has POSIX semaphores.  libstdc++
> configure defines
> 
> _GLIBCXX_HAVE_POSIX_SEMAPHORE
> 
> I don't understand your comments about disabling semaphore on AIX
> while the comment about experimental for GCC11 implies that this is
> some new, experimental feature.  I could understand disabling the
> experimental feature, but not disabling all semaphore support.
> 
> Thanks, David

The #error would not be hit if _GLIBCXX_HAVE_POSIX_SEMAPHORE were 
defined, but it shows up in your error report.

Specifically -

/tmp/GCC/powerpc-ibm-aix7.2.3.0/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/semaphore_base.h:259:
error: #error "No suitable semaphore implementation available"


More information about the Gcc mailing list