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 8D6383858C5E; Thu, 23 Feb 2023 10:43:53 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8D6383858C5E
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1677149033;
	bh=iFofevzBk2eklnle71i4Ro0vgMTAkYsIYN2TgYOJ8C4=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=AHhuTAM5io3R9X5ZtfhASPID0XDC0Jhl2xwfroC0Ss+BqzVObgWfOERrM4EBdvFiR
	 6lI/Md+wHojsrokudDaLGqQzv4fGucZUrliu/PY8vOuObZFj2bWEen94w1H/lN4KHH
	 Tka7/Ve8dJaNUoyDG2VYkmEWgRjQIcy1lXqTcdx4=
From: "ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug d/106977] [13 regression] d21 dies with SIGBUS on 32-bit Darwin
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 10:43:53 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: d
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-106977-4-v0pNvdvUqb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106977-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106977-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106977

--- Comment #9 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> +
> +/* NODE is a FUNCTION_DECL, VAR_DECL or RECORD_TYPE for the declaration =
SYM.
> +   Set flags to reflect visibility that NODE will get in the object file=
.=20
> */
> +
> +void
> +set_visibility_for_decl (tree node, Dsymbol *sym)
>=20
> hmmm.. should the call be "set_visibility_for_decl (decl, decl->csym); ?
>=20
> or should the signature of set_visibility_for_decl() be
> set_visibility_for_decl (Dsymbol *sym, tree node)?
>=20
> or maybe I misread the comment....
I might be unclear, first parameter (NODE) is a tree *_DECL representation =
for
the second parameters (SYM) that is the associated front-end symbol.=