From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-19562-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30557 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2002 15:26:03 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30518 invoked by uid 71); 13 Jun 2002 15:26:01 -0000
Resent-Date: 13 Jun 2002 15:26:01 -0000
Resent-Message-ID: <20020613152601.30517.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
Resent-From: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org (GNATS Filer)
Resent-To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Resent-Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Resent-Reply-To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, jbeulich@novell.com
Received: (qmail 20854 invoked by uid 61); 13 Jun 2002 15:17:17 -0000
Message-Id: <20020613151717.20852.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 08:26:00 -0000
From: jbeulich@novell.com
Reply-To: jbeulich@novell.com
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
X-Send-Pr-Version: gnatsweb-2.9.3 (1.1.1.1.2.31)
Subject: middle-end/7018: incorrect bitfield handling
X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00303.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>


>Number:         7018
>Category:       middle-end
>Synopsis:       incorrect bitfield handling
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          wrong-code
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Jun 13 08:26:01 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     Jan Beulich
>Release:        3.1
>Organization:
>Environment:
cross compilers hosted on Cygwin (Win2K)
>Description:
The handling of bitfields where the type is wider than int,
but the actual width is narrower than int is incorrect in
that such bitfields are operated on as if they are ints.
While certainly one can say that this is an extension
anyway, having this inconsistent with the rest of the
language doesn't seem to make sense (and the whole point of
declaring a narrow bit field with a wide type is obviously
to force the compiler to perform calculations with the wider
precision), and the correction is simple.
>How-To-Repeat:
struct s {
	unsigned long long uf:1;
};

unsigned long long utest(const struct s*ps) {
	return ps->uf << 32;
}
>Fix:
In default_conversion, make the bit-field sub-clause
convert the type to [unsigned] int only when the original
type isn't wider, and use the wider type in the other cases.
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: