stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Liviu Nicoara <>
Subject STDCXX-1066 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]
Date Sat, 15 Sep 2012 17:02:41 GMT
On 9/1/12 1:52 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote:> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, >
 > I opened yesterday STDCXX-1066:
 > about the pthread_mutex_t/pthread_cond_t alignment on SPARCV8. I'll
 > have patches done this weekend. Achtung: the patchset is very large
 > and touches a very large number of files. It's strange that I didn't
 > get an email about STDCXX-1066.

Hi Stefan,

I have read through the patches attached to the incident, then I briefly read 
about the SunPro pragma align and pack. Two questions:

1. AFAICT, the use of the packing pragma may interfere with a user's setting of 
the same value. I.e., a user sets the packing in their sources and then, 
directly or not, includes an STDCXX header. It seems to me that in such a 
situation, our setting of the packing value would interfere with the rest of the 
user's translation unit, since there is no way to `restore' the previous packing 

Something along the lines of:

// user source file

#pragma pack (X) // X != 8

#include <iostream>

struct UserDef
     // different alignment than X ?
     // ...

Is my understanding correct?

2. The patches are against 4.2.1, but the change would be binary incompatible 
with the already released 4.2.1 branch. Do you plan to have this fix in 4.3.x?



View raw message