From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 115823 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2015 15:28:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 115760 invoked by uid 48); 4 Apr 2015 15:28:18 -0000 From: "bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/56997] Incorrect write to packed field when strict-volatile-bitfields enabled on aarch32 Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2015 15:28:00 -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: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: 2015-04/txt/msg00283.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56997 --- Comment #18 from Bernd Edlinger --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #17) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16) > > This testcase fails on aarch64 when SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS is true. > > hmm, yes. > > there are targets that define SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=1, but > they also define STRICT_ALIGNMENT=1 at the same time. > probably this combination is not tested at all. > > does it pass if you use -mstrict-align ? BTW. SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS is no longer used in the strict volatile bitfields code path after r221222.