[Bug ada/64985] New: Default Scalar Storage Order Fails when an address is associated with a record

[Bug ada/64985] New: Default Scalar Storage Order Fails when an address is associated with a record

[daniel.merrill at psware dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64985

            Bug ID: 64985
           Summary: Default Scalar Storage Order Fails when an address is
                    associated with a record
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: ada
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: daniel.merrill at psware dot com
                CC: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org

Created attachment 34707
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34707&action=edit
Addresses failure when default scalar storage order is set.

The ada compiler crashes when trying to link a record which contains an address
and is set to a different scalar storage order than the default. Example code
to reproduce the problem included.

[Bug ada/64985] Default Scalar Storage Order Fails when an address is associated with a record

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64985

Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-02-09
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed, but please do _not_ use this pragma, it's essentially untested and
is guaranteed to be a disaster performance-wise...

[Bug ada/64985] segfault on address of record with reverse Scalar Storage Order

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64985

--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Confirmed, but please do _not_ use this pragma, it's essentially untested
> and is guaranteed to be a disaster performance-wise...

This comment is only for the configuration pragma, the regular form is OK.

[Bug ada/64985] segfault on address of record with reverse Scalar Storage Order

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64985

--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Feb 10 22:18:54 2015
New Revision: 220597

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220597&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR ada/64985
    * varasm.c (initializer_constant_valid_p_1) <CONSTRUCTOR>: Deal with
    TYPE_REVERSE_STORAGE_ORDER.
cp/
    * constexpr.c (reduced_constant_expression_p) <CONSTRUCTOR>: Deal with
    TYPE_REVERSE_STORAGE_ORDER.
    * typeck2.c (split_nonconstant_init_1) <RECORD_TYPE>: Likewise.
ada/
    * gcc-interface/utils2.c (gnat_build_constructor): Deal with
    TYPE_REVERSE_STORAGE_ORDER.
testsuite/
    * gnat.dg/specs/sso_msgs.ads: Rename into...
    * gnat.dg/specs/sso1.ads: ...this.
    * gnat.dg/specs/sso2.ads: New test.
    * gcc.dg/sso-1.c: Likewise.
    * g++.dg/sso-1.C: Likewise.

Added:
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/sso-1.C
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sso-1.c
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/specs/sso1.ads
      - copied, changed from r220586,
branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/specs/sso_msgs.ads
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/specs/sso2.ads
Removed:
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/testsuite/gnat.dg/specs/sso_msgs.ads
Modified:
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/ada/gcc-interface/utils2.c
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/cp/constexpr.c
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/cp/typeck2.c
    branches/scalar-storage-order/gcc/varasm.c

[Bug ada/64985] segfault on address of record with reverse Scalar Storage Order

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64985

Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |5.0

--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed on the branch.