public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "kikairoya at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/50521] -fstrict-volatile-bitfields is not strict
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 06:50:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-50521-4-bSlYsxOsDg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-50521-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50521

--- Comment #13 from Tomohiro Kashiwada <kikairoya at gmail dot com> 2011-10-29 06:50:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Regarding the double load. In a statement like a = b, both a & be should be
> individually accessed even if they refer to the same storage. So  
> bitfield.bits.a = bitfield.bits.c should load the bitfield variable twice, once
> for reading the rvalue and once for masking the lvalue assignment.
> 
> See 7.1.7.5 second and third paragraph and the note just after.

Is that means a statement
  a = b;
always should be treat as if
  tmp = b;
  a = tmp;
two individual statements?


> Regarding STRICT_ALIGNMENT, not strictly needed on ARM i think. Smaller
> accesses than the base type is acceptable, as long as it's aligned to the
> matching access size (8/16/32/64 bit) and on ARMv7 unaligned access is allowed,
> but at a performance penalty. And this change is technically unrelated to
> strict-volatile-bitfields even if there is overlap.

I think STRICT_ALIGNMENT is not only for ARM, but also MIPS, SH and others.
I'll create new ticket later about STRICT_ALIGNMENT.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-10-29  6:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-26  7:18 [Bug c/50521] New: " kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-09-26 11:43 ` [Bug c/50521] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-09-26 12:08 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-09-27  8:22 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-10-20  1:54 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-10-27 23:23 ` henrik at henriknordstrom dot net
2011-10-28  1:33 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-10-28  2:00 ` henrik at henriknordstrom dot net
2011-10-28  3:59 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-10-28  7:34 ` henrik at henriknordstrom dot net
2011-10-28  8:13 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-10-28  8:15 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com
2011-10-28 17:46 ` henrik at henriknordstrom dot net
2011-10-29  6:50 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com [this message]
2011-10-29 10:46 ` henrik at henriknordstrom dot net
2011-10-29 14:37 ` kikairoya at gmail dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-50521-4-bSlYsxOsDg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).