[cft] fix big-endian bitfield problems

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 12:49:25PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Will someone please test this on powerpc, sparc, and hppa and see
> > if it does the job?
> 
> The testsuite is clean again on sparc-sun-solaris2.8, but we still have a few 
> regressions on sparc64-sun-solaris2.9:

I saw no regressions on {i386,ia64,ppc,ppc64,s390,s390x}-redhat-linux, but
on x86_64-redhat-linux I got following regressions:
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-11 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-11 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-11 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-1 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-1 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-1 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-2 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-2 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-2 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-4 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-4 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-4 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-return-2 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-return-2 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/compat/struct-return-2 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t002 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t002 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t002 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t003 c_compat_x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t003 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t003 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t009 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t010 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t013 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t014 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t016 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t020 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t023 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t024 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t028 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute
FAIL: gcc.dg/struct-by-value-1.c (test for excess errors)
WARNING: gcc.dg/struct-by-value-1.c compilation failed to produce executable

It was an automated build and I don't have the tree any longer, so
I'm now building it by hand.

	Jakub