Re: PATCH libatomic

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost>]

On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 10:03:27PM +0200, Jaromír Doleček wrote:
> Le dim. 10 mai 2020 à 20:25, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%bec.de@localhost> a écrit :
> > I find it funny that you pick an example where correctly working
> > atomic implementation is essential and where the only reason it is
> > pulled in is a bug in GCC.
> 
> Yet the developers made conscious choice to depend on libatomic by
> explicitly requiring 128bit atomic operations, and the only platform
> where this doesn't work is apparently NetBSD.

Emitting libcalls for 128bit atomics when explicitly instructed that
the support is present is a bug. That's why this is an issue with GCC
and not with Clang.

Joerg