[patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Kai Tietz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 738 bytes --]

Hello,

This patch enables by default for native Windows targets the
-mms-bitfields option, like the netware target does.

ChangeLog gcc/

	* config/i386/mingw32.h (TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT): Add
	MASK_MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT bit.

ChangeLog gcc/testsuite

	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C: Add for i?86/x86_64-*-mingw*
	targets the additional -mno-ms-bitfields and
	-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat options.
	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C: Likewise.
	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C: Likewise.
	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C: Likewise.
	* gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c: Likewise.
	* gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c: Likewise.
	* gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c: Likewise.
	* gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c: Likewise.

Tested for i686-w64-mingw32, x86_64-w64-mingw32, and
x86_&4-pc-linux-gnu. Ok for apply?

Regards,
Kai

[-- Attachment #2: wt_msbitfield.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 5968 bytes --]

Index: gcc/gcc/config/i386/mingw32.h
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/config/i386/mingw32.h	2011-04-12 12:07:34.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gcc/config/i386/mingw32.h	2011-04-12 12:13:05.891324300 +0200
@@ -22,6 +22,17 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
 #undef DEFAULT_ABI
 #define DEFAULT_ABI MS_ABI
 
+/* By default, target has a 80387, uses IEEE compatible arithmetic,
+   returns float values in the 387 and needs stack probes.
+   We also align doubles to 64-bits for MSVC default compatibility.
+   Additionally we enable MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT by default.  */
+
+#undef TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT
+#define TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT \
+	(MASK_80387 | MASK_IEEE_FP | MASK_FLOAT_RETURNS \
+	 | MASK_STACK_PROBE | MASK_ALIGN_DOUBLE \
+	 | MASK_MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT)
+
 /* See i386/crtdll.h for an alternative definition. _INTEGRAL_MAX_BITS
    is for compatibility with native compiler.  */
 #define EXTRA_OS_CPP_BUILTINS()					\
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C	2010-11-11 18:00:57.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C	2011-04-12 14:32:33.112826500 +0200
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* Remove pedantic.  Allow the GCC extension to use char for bitfields.  */
 /* { dg-options "" } */
-/* { dg-options "-mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target { i?86-*-netware i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t /* { dg-message "note: offset of packed bit-field 't::b' has changed in GCC 4.4" "" { target pcc_bitfield_type_matters } } */
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C	2010-09-09 16:04:53.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C	2011-04-12 12:29:11.612455300 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat" } */
-/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target { i?86-*-netware i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C	2010-11-11 18:00:57.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C	2011-04-12 14:33:10.989636200 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "" } */
-/* { dg-options "-mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target { i?86-*-netware i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t /* { dg-message "note: offset of packed bit-field 't::b' has changed in GCC 4.4" "" { target pcc_bitfield_type_matters } } */
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C	2010-09-09 16:04:52.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C	2011-04-12 14:33:35.115199800 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat" } */
-/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target { i?86-*-netware i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c	2010-11-11 18:00:57.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c	2011-04-12 14:23:33.380789200 +0200
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
 /* Remove pedantic.  Allow the GCC extension to use char for bitfields.  */
 /* { dg-options "" } */
 /* { dg-options "-mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-mno-ms-bitfields -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat" { target { i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c	2010-09-09 16:02:35.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c	2011-04-12 12:22:00.129163900 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat" } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target { i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c	2010-11-11 18:00:57.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c	2011-04-12 14:29:02.181541600 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "" } */
 /* { dg-options "-mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-mno-ms-bitfields -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat" { target { i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t
 {
Index: gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c	2010-09-09 16:02:30.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c	2011-04-12 14:24:04.904792200 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat" } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target i?86-*-netware } } */
+/* { dg-options "-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -mno-ms-bitfields" { target { i?86-*-mingw* x86_64-*-mingw* } } } */
 
 struct t
 {

Re: [patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Richard Henderson]

On 04/12/2011 05:47 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> ChangeLog gcc/
> 
> 	* config/i386/mingw32.h (TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT): Add
> 	MASK_MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT bit.
> 
> ChangeLog gcc/testsuite
> 
> 	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C: Add for i?86/x86_64-*-mingw*
> 	targets the additional -mno-ms-bitfields and
> 	-Wno-packed-bitfield-compat options.
> 	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C: Likewise.
> 	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C: Likewise.
> 	* g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C: Likewise.
> 	* gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c: Likewise.
> 	* gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c: Likewise.
> 	* gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c: Likewise.
> 	* gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c: Likewise.

Ok.


r~

Re: [patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Kai Tietz]

2011/4/12 Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>:
> On 04/12/2011 05:47 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> ChangeLog gcc/
>>
>>       * config/i386/mingw32.h (TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT): Add
>>       MASK_MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT bit.
>>
>> ChangeLog gcc/testsuite
>>
>>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C: Add for i?86/x86_64-*-mingw*
>>       targets the additional -mno-ms-bitfields and
>>       -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat options.
>>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C: Likewise.
>>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C: Likewise.
>>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C: Likewise.
>>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c: Likewise.
>>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c: Likewise.
>>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c: Likewise.
>>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c: Likewise.
>
> Ok.
>
>
> r~
>


Applied at revision 172336.

Thanks,
Kai

Re: [patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Pedro Alves]

On Tuesday 12 April 2011 19:53:42, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2011/4/12 Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>:
> > On 04/12/2011 05:47 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >> ChangeLog gcc/
> >>
> >>       * config/i386/mingw32.h (TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT): Add
> >>       MASK_MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT bit.
> >>
> >> ChangeLog gcc/testsuite
> >>
> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C: Add for i?86/x86_64-*-mingw*
> >>       targets the additional -mno-ms-bitfields and
> >>       -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat options.
> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C: Likewise.
> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C: Likewise.
> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C: Likewise.
> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c: Likewise.
> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c: Likewise.
> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c: Likewise.
> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c: Likewise.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> >
> > r~
> >
> 
> 
> Applied at revision 172336.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kai
> 

This is a default ABI change (IIRC, when the option was
introduced, it was left off as default so to not break the ABI).

Shouldn't we advertise it somewhere?

-- 
Pedro Alves

Re: [patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Kai Tietz]

2011/4/13 Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>:
> On Tuesday 12 April 2011 19:53:42, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> 2011/4/12 Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>:
>> > On 04/12/2011 05:47 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> >> ChangeLog gcc/
>> >>
>> >>       * config/i386/mingw32.h (TARGET_SUBTARGET_DEFAULT): Add
>> >>       MASK_MS_BITFIELD_LAYOUT bit.
>> >>
>> >> ChangeLog gcc/testsuite
>> >>
>> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield2.C: Add for i?86/x86_64-*-mingw*
>> >>       targets the additional -mno-ms-bitfields and
>> >>       -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat options.
>> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield3.C: Likewise.
>> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield4.C: Likewise.
>> >>       * g++.dg/ext/bitfield5.C: Likewise.
>> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-15.c: Likewise.
>> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-16.c: Likewise.
>> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-17.c: Likewise.
>> >>       * gcc.dg/bitfld-18.c: Likewise.
>> >
>> > Ok.
>> >
>> >
>> > r~
>> >
>>
>>
>> Applied at revision 172336.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kai
>>
>
> This is a default ABI change (IIRC, when the option was
> introduced, it was left off as default so to not break the ABI).
>
> Shouldn't we advertise it somewhere?
>
> --
> Pedro Alves
>

Yes, I did recently a lot of abi changing for mingw's targets.  They
all will need a nice description (and possible ways to get old default
behavior) in changes.html

I collect them for later.  Or do you mean it should be noted earlier?

Regards,
Kai

Re: [patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Pedro Alves]

On Wednesday 13 April 2011 11:43:43, Kai Tietz wrote:
> > This is a default ABI change (IIRC, when the option was
> > introduced, it was left off as default so to not break the ABI).
> >
> > Shouldn't we advertise it somewhere?

> Yes, I did recently a lot of abi changing for mingw's targets.  They
> all will need a nice description (and possible ways to get old default
> behavior) in changes.html
> 
> I collect them for later.  Or do you mean it should be noted earlier?

As long as it's mentioned somewhere before a release, that's fine
with me.

(Though mentioning changes as you do them has better chances of
something not getting forgotten, or in case you end up
unavailable.  Hope not! :-) )

-- 
Pedro Alves

Re: [patch i386 mingw g++.dg gcc.dg]: Set -mms-bitfields as default for native windows targets

[Dave Korn]

On 13/04/2011 11:49, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 April 2011 11:43:43, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>> This is a default ABI change (IIRC, when the option was
>>> introduced, it was left off as default so to not break the ABI).
>>>
>>> Shouldn't we advertise it somewhere?
> 
>> Yes, I did recently a lot of abi changing for mingw's targets.  They
>> all will need a nice description (and possible ways to get old default
>> behavior) in changes.html
>>
>> I collect them for later.  Or do you mean it should be noted earlier?
> 
> As long as it's mentioned somewhere before a release, that's fine
> with me.
> 
> (Though mentioning changes as you do them has better chances of
> something not getting forgotten, or in case you end up
> unavailable.  Hope not! :-) )

  Now we're coming up for a release.... did this happen?

    cheers,
      DaveK