From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13466 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2007 17:18:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 13416 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Aug 2007 17:18:05 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp1.dnsmadeeasy.com (HELO smtp1.dnsmadeeasy.com) (205.234.170.134) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Aug 2007 17:17:55 +0000 Received: from smtp1.dnsmadeeasy.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.dnsmadeeasy.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08C30308669; Tue, 7 Aug 2007 17:17:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Authenticated-Name: js.dnsmadeeasy X-Transit-System: In case of SPAM please contact abuse@dnsmadeeasy.com Received: from avtrex.com (unknown [67.116.42.147]) by smtp1.dnsmadeeasy.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2007 17:17:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.7.26] ([192.168.7.26]) by avtrex.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:17:50 -0700 Message-ID: <46B8A93D.1060405@avtrex.com> Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 17:18:00 -0000 From: David Daney User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: GCJ-patches , GCC Patches , andreast@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [Patch] libffi testsuite: Correct some type specifiers. References: <46B89D13.50708@avtrex.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-08/txt/msg00446.txt.bz2 Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "David" == David Daney writes: > > David> Whilst hacking things up to get MIPS64 working better in libffi, I > David> came across several test cases where structure elements were declared > David> as type 'int' but the libffi type specifier identified them as uint32. > > David> This patch corrects some (but probably not all) of these incongruities. > > I think a patch to fix a disparity like this would qualify as obvious. > > However... if the struct definition says 'int', and the test case is > says ffi_type_sint32, then that seems like a bug in itself. There's > no guarantee that int == 32 bits. Wouldn't it be more correct to use > ffi_type_sint? I thought of that after I sent the patch, and I agree. The problem is pervasive in the testsuite. Patch withdrawn. I will submit a revised patch soon. David Daney