[Bug middle-end/28161] Wrong bit field layout with -mms-bitfields
kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Mon Jun 26 23:28:00 GMT 2006
------- Comment #3 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-26 23:10 -------
GDB says that TREE_TYPE of a.d is the 32-bit integer and its
DECL_BIT_FIELD_TYPE is 64-bit when place_field processes a.e.
place_field uses the size of TREE_TYPE of the previous bit filed
when deciding whether a bit field to be packed with the previous
one or not. It seems that this makes the ms-bitfiled code
confused. The appended patch is to make place_field use
DECL_BIT_FIELD_TYPE of the previous bit field instead of
TREE_TYPE when comparing the size of consecutive bit fields.
It works for the above testcase, though the thorough tests are
needed.
--- ORIG/trunk/gcc/stor-layout.c 2006-06-13 09:06:36.000000000 +0900
+++ LOCAL/trunk/gcc/stor-layout.c 2006-06-26 16:44:31.000000000 +0900
@@ -1022,6 +1022,7 @@ place_field (record_layout_info rli, tre
if (targetm.ms_bitfield_layout_p (rli->t))
{
tree prev_saved = rli->prev_field;
+ tree prev_type = prev_saved ? DECL_BIT_FIELD_TYPE (prev_saved) : NULL;
/* This is a bitfield if it exists. */
if (rli->prev_field)
@@ -1037,8 +1038,7 @@ place_field (record_layout_info rli, tre
&& !integer_zerop (DECL_SIZE (rli->prev_field))
&& host_integerp (DECL_SIZE (rli->prev_field), 0)
&& host_integerp (TYPE_SIZE (type), 0)
- && simple_cst_equal (TYPE_SIZE (type),
- TYPE_SIZE (TREE_TYPE (rli->prev_field))))
+ && simple_cst_equal (TYPE_SIZE (type), TYPE_SIZE (prev_type)))
{
/* We're in the middle of a run of equal type size fields; make
sure we realign if we run out of bits. (Not decl size,
@@ -1105,8 +1108,7 @@ place_field (record_layout_info rli, tre
if (!DECL_BIT_FIELD_TYPE (field)
|| (prev_saved != NULL
- ? !simple_cst_equal (TYPE_SIZE (type),
- TYPE_SIZE (TREE_TYPE (prev_saved)))
+ ? !simple_cst_equal (TYPE_SIZE (type), TYPE_SIZE (prev_type))
: !integer_zerop (DECL_SIZE (field)) ))
{
/* Never smaller than a byte for compatibility. */
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28161
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list