Re: [patch c++]: PR c++/44294 abi/bitfield12.C regression

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
>> Are you sure this is safe? ?There have often been problems in the past
>> with targets using machine modes to determine the function-calling ABI,
>> which means that anything that could change the mode assigned to a
>> structure or union type is dangerous unless you can show it won't affect
>> any targets using modes to determine ABIs.
>
> And the patch is backwards, MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE should be used to determine
> whether __int128 is supported for the target, not the other way around.
>

How about this patch?


-- 
H.J.
--
gcc/ada/

2010-05-26  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	PR c++/44294
	* gcc-interface/decl.c (MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE): Removed.

gcc/cp/

2010-05-26  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	PR c++/44294
	* class.c (layout_class_type): Check MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE on
	bit-field.

gcc/

2010-05-26  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	PR c++/44294
	* defaults.h (MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE): New.

	* stor-layout.c (MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE): Removed.

Attachment: gcc-pr44294-2.patch
Description: Text document