--- Comment #2 from lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de 2006-12-13 12:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=12794)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12794&action=view)
preprocessed file to reproduce the bug.
I have now attached the file that reproduces the bug
--- Additional Comments From lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de 2005-08-11
08:15 ---
The bitfield mv7 is actually signed, not unsigned:
struct et7
{
struct dt7 { float iv7; unsigned short int jv7; } kv7;
float lv7[0];
signed mv7:9;
short int nv7;
double ov7;
float
--- Additional Comments From lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de 2005-08-11
08:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=9468)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9468&action=view)
Test case to reproduce the bug.
This is the same code that I included in the bug desc
quot;, 145, "bav7
== fp7"), 0)));
((void) ((bbv7.tv7 == gp7.tv7) ? 0 : (__eprintf ("%s:%u: failed assertion
`%s'\n", "gcc-4.1.1-ppc.c",
146, "bbv7.tv7 == gp7.tv7"), 0)));
((void) ((bcv7[0] == hp7[0]) ? 0 : (__eprintf ("%s:%u: failed assertion
`%s'\n", "gcc-4.1.1-ppc.c", 147,
"bcv7[0] == hp7[0]"), 0)));
((void) ((bdv7 == ip7) ? 0 : (__eprintf ("%s:%u: failed assertion `%s'\n",
"gcc-4.1.1-ppc.c", 148, "bdv7
== ip7"), 0)));
return uv7;
}
static void caller_bf7( )
{
unsigned char bev7;
bev7 = callee_af7 (vv7, wv7, xv7, yv7, zv7, bav7, bbv7, bcv7, bdv7);
((void) ((uv7 == bev7) ? 0 : (__eprintf ("%s:%u: failed assertion `%s'\n",
"gcc-4.1.1-ppc.c", 156, "uv7
== bev7"), 0)));
}
int main( int argc, char **argv )
{
caller_bf6 ();
caller_bf7 ();
return errors;
}
--
Summary: unsigned bitfield in struct not passed correctly as
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0
GCC host triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0
GCC target triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23324
--- Additional Comments From lindig at cs dot uni-sb dot de 2005-01-06
07:41 ---
Subject: Re: GCC 3.3/Irix 6.5 union as vararg not passed correctly
On Jan 5, 2005, at 7:07 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Can you test 3.4.x as there were changes to the MIPS back-end wh
