On 08/23/2012 03:51 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
WRT only the code expansion aspects in store_fixed_bit_field(), would a
test of "STRICT_ALIGNMENT&& MEM_ALIGN(op0)< GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT(mode)"
be sufficient to detect instead of a packedp parameter?
As an experiment, I tried putting in an assertio
On 08/23/2012 03:08 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
In fact, you should probably implement code-generation constraints from
within the frontends by, for strict volatile bitfields, emitting loads/stores
using DECL_BIT_FIELD_REPRESENTATIVE (doing read-modify-write
explicitely). Or maybe you can elabo
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> On 2012/8/23 05:08, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> First of all the warning should be probably issued from stor-layout.c
>>> itself - see
>>> other cases where we warn about packed structs. Yes, that means you'll
>>> get the warning even when
On 2012/8/23 05:08, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> First of all the warning should be probably issued from stor-layout.c
>> itself - see
>> other cases where we warn about packed structs. Yes, that means you'll
>> get the warning even when there is no access but you'll only get it a
>> single time.
>>
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Sandra Loosemore
> wrote:
>> On 08/22/2012 03:27 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
+ bool packedp = false;
+
+ if (TREE_CODE(to) == COMPONENT_REF
+&& (TYPE_PACKED
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 03:27 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>>>
>>> + bool packedp = false;
>>> +
>>> + if (TREE_CODE(to) == COMPONENT_REF
>>> +&& (TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (to, 0)))
>>>
>>> + || (
On 08/22/2012 03:27 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
+ bool packedp = false;
+
+ if (TREE_CODE(to) == COMPONENT_REF
+&& (TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (to, 0)))
+ || (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (to, 1)) == FIELD_DECL
+&& DECL_PACKED (TREE_OPERAND (to, 1))
> + bool packedp = false;
> +
> + if (TREE_CODE(to) == COMPONENT_REF
> + && (TYPE_PACKED (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (to, 0)))
> + || (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (to, 1)) == FIELD_DECL
> + && DECL_PACKED (TREE_OPERAND (to
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
> This patch is a followup to the addition of support for
> -fstrict-volatile-bitfields (required by the ARM EABI); see this thread
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg01889.html
>
> for discussion of the original patch.
>
> Th
