Re: ia64 linux doesn't bootstrap

[Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>]

--On Friday, October 18, 2002 10:02:32 PM -0400 David Edelsohn 
<dje@watson.ibm.com> wrote:

>>>>>> Mark Mitchell writes:
>
> Mark> But, nobody should every be trying to read or write those bits.  Why
> Mark> is that happenning?
>
> Mark> Anyhow, what is the triplet for the target?  If I run bitfield7.C on
> Mark> that target's cc1plus I take it I will see the failure?
>
> 	The target triplet seems to be any PowerPC (:-) target:
>
> powerpc-eabisim, powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu, powerpc-ibm-aix4.3.3.0 .
>
> The failure, as Janis mentioned, is g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7_y.C
> which as an ABI compatibility test expands on the original
> g++.dg/abi/bitfield7.C test.  bitfield7.C *does not* access the field and
> does not ICE.  Only Janis's new test, bitfield7_y.C, operates on the
> bitfield eliciting the ICE.  This may be a failure which only visibly ICEs
> on big-endian targets due to the logic in extract_bit_field.

I don't understand the subject line of this thread.  Does this actually
affect a bootstrap on ia64 GNU/Linux?

If the only way to get this problem is with a bitfield longer than its
type, it's not a terribly important bug.  That code didn't used to be
accepted by GCC 2.95.x; it gave a sorry.  Now we crash on some targets.

This is a bug well worth fixing, but I'm trying to figure out if I need
to look at it *right now*.

In any case, please get it into GNATS.

Then, mark it with an appropriate priority.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Mitchell                mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com