On 02/15/2018 08:00 PM, Jan Boehme wrote:
Hi,
I'm working on building GCC 7.3 on Centos6.8.
I'm running in the same issue as described in GCC bug ticket 79427:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79427
FAIL: g++.dg/tls/thread_local-order2.C -std=c++11 execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/tls/thread_local-order2.C -std=c++14 execution test
The executable runs into abort() caused by a wrong destruction order
tracked by counter variables due to a possible malfunction of thread_local
My libc is glibc-2.12-1.192.el6.x86_64
binutils are binutils-2.20.51.0.2-5.44.el6.x86_64
My configure flags are:
--disable-libstdcxx-pch \
--disable-multilib \
--enable-shared \
--enable-static \
--enable-__cxa_atexit \
--enable-tls \
--enable-clocale=gnu \
--enable-threads=posix \
--enable-languages=c++ \
--enable-ld=yes \
--enable-gold=yes \
CC=/usr/bin/gcc \
CXX=/usr/bin/g++ \
--with-build-config=bootstrap-O3
I appreciate any hint to overcome this issue.
Now I found out:
#1 the same behavior can be seen when bootstrapping on Centos7 using
these settings.
#2 the same behavior can be seen when using the C7 standard compiler:
g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-16)
g++ /tmp/gcc-7.3.0/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tls/thread_local-order2.C -o
/tmp/thread_local-order2.exe -std=c++11
/tmp/thread_local-order2.exe
Aborted (core dumped)
/lib64/libc.so.6
GNU C Library (GNU libc) stable release version 2.17
It seems to me that this regression? is unknown or accepted over there.
Any encouragement to file a bug for Centos/Redhat?
Regards, Jan
