This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: DATA_ALIGNMENT vs. DECL_USER_ALIGNMENT
- From: Ulrich Weigand <weigand at immd1 dot informatik dot uni-erlangen dot de>
- To: rth at redhat dot com
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 02:27:54 +0200 (MET DST)
- Subject: Re: DATA_ALIGNMENT vs. DECL_USER_ALIGNMENT
Richard Henderson wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 06:35:54PM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
>> I definitely think there's a bug in that the Ada front end sets
>> DECL_USER_ALIGN for these objects and the C front end (in response to
>> the auto-generated files) does not. That mis-match should be
>> addressed in some way -- either by not setting DECL_USER_ALIGN in Ada
>>
>> But it *isn't* set in Ada!
>
>Ulrich's experience clearly belies this.
You probably missed one of the forks of this thread; to clear
up possible confusion, what happens is that the Ada frontend
does in fact not set DECL_USER_ALIGN, only TYPE_USER_ALIGN.
It is the middle-end (stor-layout.c), that copies TYPE_USER_ALIGN
to DECL_USER_ALIGN. And in fact, this is done only as a result
of a patch by Jason Merrill as of last week:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-04/msg00209.html
As this patch is a bit complex, I'm not sure if the change in
behaviour (for Ada) was intended or not, but this patch is
definitely the immediate cause of the s390x / Ada problems ...
Bye,
Ulrich
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
weigand at informatik dot uni-erlangen dot de