aaron.ballman added a comment. In D151834#4644375 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D151834#4644375>, @zahiraam wrote:
> In D151834#4644373 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D151834#4644373>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> In D151834#4643925 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D151834#4643925>, @uabelho >> wrote: >> >>> Hi @zahiraam , >>> >>> I have a couple of downstream testcases that fail with this patch. >>> Before >>> >>> > clang bbi-86364.c -lm -O3 >>> > ./a.out >>> >>> passed but with the patch the assert in the program fails: >>> >>> a.out: bbi-86364.c:9: int main(): Assertion `(*__errno_location ()) == >>> 33' failed. >>> >>> Is this as expected? >>> >>> F29200339: bbi-86364.c <https://reviews.llvm.org/F29200339> >> >> This seems unexpected to me and it seems to relate to whether you include >> errno.h or not: https://godbolt.org/z/EPWzazx9r -- @zahiraam do you have >> ideas as to what's going on? > > I haven't looked at it as I saw that the comment has been deleted. Let me > look into it. Oh, it's not the inclusion of errno.h that matters, it's the declaration of `__errno_location`: https://godbolt.org/z/zo4PaPEME -- it seems that inclusion of `__attribute__ ((__const__))` is what makes the distinction: https://godbolt.org/z/1bePhvaG4 Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D151834/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D151834 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
