SixWeining added a comment.
In D132285#3736922 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D132285#3736922>, @xry111 wrote:
> Are cases like
>
> struct x { double a; __int128 : 0; double b;};
> double f(struct x x) { return x.a + x.b; }
>
> handled properly? AFAIK RISC-V clang currently does not handle it correctly:
>
> https://godbolt.org/z/rvM99zbqc (GCC handles it properly)
> https://godbolt.org/z/sWY5vs5ce (Clang does not handle it properly)
>
> Note that we rectified the ABI to match the behavior of RISC-V GCC
> deliberately (https://gcc.gnu.org/r12-8294) but I didn't rewrite the document
> because the behavior is not easy to describe with my poor English.
Thanks. Since current ABI doesn’t document the behavior of zero-bit fields so I
pay less attention to this case. Let me check it later.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132285/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132285
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
