[PATCH] bootstrap: include string/vector before abort redefinition

2020-12-21 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
Similar to 1467a5c and PR 98412. Bootstrapping on FreeBSD 12.2 with the default compiler (Clang 10.0.1) fails if the and headers are included after abort is redefined to fancy_abort. Appears to be missing defines in the new C++ module code. The following patch is sufficient. gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-17 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/17/20 1:05 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Thanks for looking into this. I've gotten confused now, though. Which patch fixes the problem on Solaris? Thanks. Ian The patch I submitted upstream is all that is needed to fix the compilation failures on Solaris: https://go-review.googlesou

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-17 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/17/20 7:28 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: I first tried with the new version included, but that broke badly: cc1 -fpreprocessed sysinfo.i -quiet -O -std=gnu99 -fdump-go-spec=tmp-gen-sysinfo.go -o sysinfo.s now SEGVs with either infinite or very deep recursion: Thread 2 received signal SIGSEGV,

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-16 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/16/20 3:13 PM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: On 12/16/20 2:20 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Nikhil, On 12/15/20 3:00 AM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: If this patch looks good, I'll submit it upstream tomorrow. Assuming no news is good news, I sent https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/gofrontend/+/278672

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-16 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/16/20 2:20 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Nikhil, On 12/15/20 3:00 AM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: If this patch looks good, I'll submit it upstream tomorrow. Assuming no news is good news, I sent https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/gofrontend/+/278672. sorry for the delay, but unfortunately n

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-16 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/15/20 3:00 AM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: If this patch looks good, I'll submit it upstream tomorrow. Assuming no news is good news, I sent https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/gofrontend/+/278672.

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-15 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/14/20 10:48 PM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: On 12/14/20 10:34 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:14 PM Nikhil Benesch wrote: Also godump now emits a dummy `type _u?pad128_t struct {}` entry, so we just suppress that and conditionally add it back. I don't understand this bi

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-14 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/14/20 10:34 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:14 PM Nikhil Benesch wrote: Also godump now emits a dummy `type _u?pad128_t struct {}` entry, so we just suppress that and conditionally add it back. I don't understand this bit. Why are we seeing an empty struct definit

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-14 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/14/20 5:30 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: with the revised godump.c patch and this one for mk*sysinfo.sh, I still get failures on all of Solaris 11.3/x86, 11.4/x86, and 11.4/SPARC (didn't try 11.3/SPARC): * Solaris 11.3/x86 and 11.4/x86: runtime_sysinfo.go:5995:6: error: redefinition of '_upad128

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-14 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
Thanks very much, Ian. I'll submit the second half of the patch (the changes to mk[r]sysinfo.sh) tomorrow. On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:39 AM Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 3:30 PM Nikhil Benesch > wrote: > > > > On 12/13/20 4:55 PM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: > > > There are a few

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-13 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/13/20 4:55 PM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: There are a few more hurdles before this patch is ready for commit. The changes to godump.c deserve new test cases. [...] Updated patch attached, as promised, and is ready for review. gcc/: * godump.c (go_output_typedef): Suppress typedefs who

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-13 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/10/20 4:44 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: I'm attaching the -save-temps output, so you can work on the real data rather than trying to figure things out from the Illumos repos. Thanks, that was helpful. I also have successfully acquired access to gcc211, so I should be self sufficient moving forw

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-10 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 12/10/20 2:34 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: I've just checked: is effectively unchanged since Solaris 10. Besides, there's gcc211 in the GCC compile farm, running Solaris 11.3/SPARC. Ah, thanks, I wasn't aware there was a compile farm available to GCC developers. I've applied for an account, but

Re: [PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-10 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
Sorry about this, Rainer. I think I see the issue, though it's hard to be certain without access to a Solaris machine. Assuming the icmp6.h header hasn't changed since the last time Solaris code was open source [0], I think the issue is likely to be typedefs that define a named struct and an alias

[PATCH] Correct -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types

2020-12-08 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
This patch corrects -fdump-go-spec's handling of incomplete types. To my knowledge the issue fixed here has not been previously reported. It was exposed by an in-progress port of gccgo to FreeBSD. Given the following C code struct s_fwd v_fwd; struct s_fwd { }; -fdump-go-spec cu

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-11-12 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 11/6/20 12:09 PM, Jeff Law wrote: So I think the best path forward is to let you and Eduard-Mihai make the technical decisions about what bits are ready for the trunk. When y'all think something is ready, let's go ahead and get it installed and iterate on things that aren't quite ready yet.

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-11-01 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 11/1/20 6:57 AM, Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote: Reading the diff patch, the v0 changes look great. I wouldn't be too worried about the "printable character" aspect, there are similar Unicode-related issues elsewhere, e.g. the "non-control ASCII" comment in decode_legacy_escape (I suppose we co

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-11-01 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 10/29/20 12:16 AM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:53 PM Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote: I agree that landing the extra changes later on top should be fine anyway, though when I make the sprintf -> snprintf change, I could provide the extra changes as well (either as a combine

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-10-28 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:53 PM Eduard-Mihai Burtescu wrote: > I agree that landing the extra changes later on top should be fine anyway, > though when I make the sprintf -> snprintf change, I could provide the extra > changes as well (either as a combined patch, or as a second tiny patch). > > Sa

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-10-28 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
I think it is mostly a matter of snagging some of Ian's limited time. I suspect it is still worthwhile to try to get the original patch reviewed and merged, because then any follow-up changes for const generics support will be smaller and easier to review. On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 5:48 PM Eduard-Mi

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-10-28 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
On 10/28/20 5:22 PM, Nikhil Benesch wrote: Ian, are you able to review this? I saw that you reviewed many of the prior changes to the Rust demangler. If not, can you suggest someone who can? Thanks very much. Nikhil I seem to have failed to convince my email client to set the appropriate re

Re: [PATCH] Support the new ("v0") mangling scheme in rust-demangle.

2020-10-28 Thread Nikhil Benesch via Gcc-patches
Ian, are you able to review this? I saw that you reviewed many of the prior changes to the Rust demangler. If not, can you suggest someone who can? Thanks very much. Nikhil