Recent go changes broke alpha bootstrap

[Dominik Vogt]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 08:05:14AM -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 5:46 AM, Dominik Vogt <vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > I'm not quite sure about the best approach.  The attempt to
> > represent C unions in the "right" way is ultimately futile as Go
> > does not have the types necessary for it.  For example, the
> > handling of anonymous bit fields will never be right as it's
> > undefinied.  On the other hand I could fix the issue at hand by
> > changing the way anonymous unions are represented in Go.
> >
> > Example:
> >
> >   struct { int8_t x; union { int16_t y; int 32_t z; }; };
> >
> > Was represented (before the patch) as
> >
> >   struct { X byte; int16 Y; }
> >
> > which had size 4, alignment 2 and y at offset 2 but should had
> > have size 8, alignment 4 and y at offset 4.  With the current
> > patch the Go layout is
> >
> >   struct { X byte; artificial_name struct { y [2]byte; align [0]int32; } }
> >
> > with the proper size, alignment and offset, but y is addressed as
> > ".artificial_name.y" insted of just ".y", and y is a byte array
> > and not an int16.
> >
> > I could remove the "artificial_name struct" and add padding before
> > and after y instead:
> >
> >   struct { X byte; pad_0 [3]byte; Y int16; pad_1 [2]byte; align [0]int32; }
> >
> > What do you think?
> 
> Sounds good to me.  Basically the fields of the anonymous union should
> be promoted to become fields of the struct.  We can't do it in
> general, but we can do it for the first field.  That addresses the
> actual uses of anonymous unions.

The attached patch fixes this, at least if the first element of the
union is not a bitfield.

Bitfields can really not be represented properly in Go (think about
constructs like "struct { int : 1; int bf : 1; }"), I'd rather not
try to represent them in a predictable way.  The patched code may
or may not give them a name, and reserves the proper amount of
padding where required in structs.  If a union begins with an
anonymous bitfield (which makes no sense), that is ignored.  If a
union begins with a named bitfield (possibly after unnamed ones),
this may or may not be used as the (sole) element of the Go
struct.

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

-- 

Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-godump-Fix-handling-of-anonymous-structs-and-unions.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 66852 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/attachments/20141103/c055e639/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
ChangeLog
2014-11-03  Dominik Vogt  <vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

	* build-go/gcc/testsuite/gcc/godump-1.out: Update godump tests.

gcc/ChangeLog
2014-11-03  Dominik Vogt  <vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

	* godump.c (go_format_type): Rewrite RECORD_TYPE nad UNION_TYPE support
	with -fdump-go-spec.  Anonymous substructures are now flattened and
	replaced by their fields (record) or the first named, non-bitfield
	field (union).