From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 1E5D3385842C; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 15:37:38 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1E5D3385842C
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/102024] [12 Regression] zero width bitfields and ABIs
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 15:37:37 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ABI
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-102024-4-z9JUYIMheG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102024-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102024-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 15:37:38 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102024

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dje at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
PowerPC seems to be (tried powerpc64le) affected as well on the same testca=
se,
        addi 2,2,.TOC.-.LCF0@l
        .localentry     _Z3barv,.-_Z3barv
        mflr 0
-       li 9,0
-       sldi 9,9,32
-       mtvsrd 1,9
+       li 3,0
        std 0,16(1)
        stdu 1,-32(1)
        .cfi_def_cfa_offset 32
        .cfi_offset 65, 16
-       xscvspdpn 1,1
-       fmr 2,1
        bl _Z3foo1S
        nop
        addi 1,1,32
seems to be the difference from C++ before my change to C++ after my change=
 and
the after my change matches what C did before and does now as well.
So like for x86-64 psABI, the question is what the psABI says and what we
should use and either way we need -Wpsabi warning for the case we'll change=
 ABI
for.=