Created attachment 23175 [details] simple testcase. Hey, After some recent changes, various projects fail to compile with clang when using -Ofast ( or -O2 -ffast-math ). Example bugs from the web: https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/issues/24935 https://github.com/dpiparo/vdt/issues/11 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/65541 I have attached a sample file that triggers the bug, taken from the Arch bugtracker: clang++ bug.cpp works clang++ bug.cpp -Ofast fails with: /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/bug-6a1f7c.o: in function `main': bug.cpp:(.text+0xd): undefined reference to `__expf_finite' clang-9: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) According to the arch user, this is likely related to https://reviews.llvm.org/D74712 Cheers, Nick
Yes, probably the same thing. If it's starting to break code already, probably should be a release blocker.
Since it's not really an llvm regression, but a glibc change, I'm not sure I want to block on this. It may have to wait until 10.0.1...
https://reviews.llvm.org/D74712 fixes the issue.
Fixed by 6d15c4deab51498b70825fb6cefbbfe8f3d9bdcf
(In reply to sguelton from comment #4) > Fixed by 6d15c4deab51498b70825fb6cefbbfe8f3d9bdcf And pushed to 10.x as cd0926d087a85c5ee1222ca80980b4440214a822. Please let me know if there are any follow-ups.
(In reply to Hans Wennborg from comment #5) > (In reply to sguelton from comment #4) > > Fixed by 6d15c4deab51498b70825fb6cefbbfe8f3d9bdcf > > And pushed to 10.x as cd0926d087a85c5ee1222ca80980b4440214a822. Please let > me know if there are any follow-ups. Is this going to be backported to the older point releases? Cheers, Nick
(In reply to Nick from comment #6) > (In reply to Hans Wennborg from comment #5) > > (In reply to sguelton from comment #4) > > > Fixed by 6d15c4deab51498b70825fb6cefbbfe8f3d9bdcf > > > > And pushed to 10.x as cd0926d087a85c5ee1222ca80980b4440214a822. Please let > > me know if there are any follow-ups. > > > Is this going to be backported to the older point releases? That's a question for Tom if he wants to consider it, but in general I don't think there are any more point releases planned for 9.x and before.
(In reply to Nick from comment #6) > (In reply to Hans Wennborg from comment #5) > > (In reply to sguelton from comment #4) > > > Fixed by 6d15c4deab51498b70825fb6cefbbfe8f3d9bdcf > > > > And pushed to 10.x as cd0926d087a85c5ee1222ca80980b4440214a822. Please let > > me know if there are any follow-ups. > > > Is this going to be backported to the older point releases? > No, we aren't planning any more 9.x releases. -Tom > Cheers, > > Nick