On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Bernd Schmidt <ber...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 11/29/11 17:35, Mitchell, Mark wrote:
>>>> So, I still think this patch is the best way to go forward, and it
>>> does
>>>> fix incorrect code generation. Would appreciate an OK.
>>>
>>> Ping.
>>
>> If you don't hear any objections within a week, please proceed.
>
> Committed now after bootstrapping i686-linux and retesting arm-linux
> (some timeout permutations in libstdc++, expected with my qemu setup).
>
>
> Bernd
Noticed a typo in toplev.c:
s/fstrict-volatile-bitfield/fstrict-volatile-bitfields/
Also I'd like to add following target independent test case
Joey Ye <joey...@arm.com>
* gcc.dg/volatile-bitfields-2.c: New test.
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/volatile-bitfields-2.c (revision 0)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/volatile-bitfields-2.c (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-options "-fstrict-volatile-bitfields" } */
+
+extern void abort(void);
+struct thing {
+ volatile unsigned short a: 8;
+ volatile unsigned short b: 8;
+} t = {1,2};
+
+int main()
+{
+ t.a = 3;
+ if (t.a !=3 || t.b !=2) abort();
+ return 0;
+}
