From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-422349-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 32529 invoked by alias); 15 May 2013 13:32:53 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 32475 invoked by uid 55); 15 May 2013 13:32:50 -0000
From: "ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libffi/56033] FAIL: libffi.call/cls_struct_va1.c on powerpc-*-* and sparc-sun-solaris2* with -m64
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 13:32:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libffi
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.1
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-56033-4-uwufgUz13L@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-56033-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-56033-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg01022.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56033

--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
[...]
>> I've included the complete patch in i386-pc-solaris2.* bootstraps, too,
>> and saw no regressions, so I suggest you post the complete patch to
>> gcc-patches, and Cc: Anthony Green.
>
> \begin{rant}
>
> I won't have the time to go through the gcc-patches hooplas before at least one
> month (in top of that I don't have write access). If someone really wants these
> fixes to be committed to 4.8.1, (s)he will have to do the work.

I don't know if we can get the patch into 4.8 at this point, but I
certainly want it for mainline.  I just suggested that you post it since
it's almost completely your work, but am fine with doing it myself.

    Rainer