From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7947 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2002 00:16:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7910 invoked by uid 71); 17 Mar 2002 00:16:00 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020317001600.7909.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: dberlin@sources.redhat.com Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: David Ashley Subject: Re: optimization/5969: When function is declared func(unsigned char v), v isn't truncated Reply-To: David Ashley X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00588.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/5969; it has been noted by GNATS. From: David Ashley To: dberlin@sources.redhat.com Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: optimization/5969: When function is declared func(unsigned char v), v isn't truncated Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:10:33 -0800 >Synopsis: When function is declared func(unsigned char v), v isn't truncated > >Responsible-Changed-From-To: unassigned->dberlin >Responsible-Changed-By: dberlin >Responsible-Changed-When: Sat Mar 16 15:01:56 2002 >Responsible-Changed-Why: > Me >State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback >State-Changed-By: dberlin >State-Changed-When: Sat Mar 16 15:01:56 2002 >State-Changed-Why: > You have implicitly declared tst to take an int by using it before it's defined. > Because it is inlined into main at -O2, and at that point it thinks it takes an int, it never performs the truncation. > > Any code after the tst function is defined to take an unsigned char will do the truncation. > > The problem is the code, not the compiler, AFAIK. > The title of the bug report is misleading, you haven't declared func(unsigned char v), if you did, the problem would go away. > >http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=5969 I think compiled code should function exactly the same with or without -O2, but that's just my opinion. The problem here wasn't that the function was being called by 'c' code, it was being called by some ppc asm code. The first thing I did was turn on -Wall, then fixed all the warnings. But I didn't get any warnings about the ppc asm code calling the C function incorrectly, of course. How can the function be inlined into main even before the function is declared? And if it is being inlined once it is declared, that means a multi pass compiler or equivalent. So the compiler should know how to call the function by then. If your function is declared void func(unsigned char x) { printf("sizeof(x)=%d\n",sizeof(x)); printf("x=%x\n",x); } You can call that from asm or from another code fragment with func(0x21); func(0x4321); and get different output. But sizeof prints out 1 for 1 byte. It seems to me inconsistent. As far as the title of the bug report being misleading, it's not like I'm an expert at reporting gcc bugs, there are basically no bugs :^). And it is difficult to explain within one line what is happening... Thanks--- Dave dash@xdr.com