From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 25AE73982414; Thu,  8 Jul 2021 09:42:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 25AE73982414
From: "david.marchand at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: libabigail@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug default/28060] [libabigail] Invalid offset for bitfields
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 09:42:49 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: libabigail
X-Bugzilla-Component: default
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: david.marchand at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dodji at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-28060-9487-t3FxZAMaeo@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-28060-9487@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-28060-9487@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: libabigail@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list of the Libabigail project <libabigail.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libabigail>,
 <mailto:libabigail-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libabigail/>
List-Help: <mailto:libabigail-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libabigail>,
 <mailto:libabigail-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 09:42:50 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D28060

--- Comment #3 from David Marchand <david.marchand at redhat dot com> ---
Thanks for looking at this issue.

(In reply to gprocida from comment #2)
> The problem is in abidw, not abidiff.
>=20
> I'm guessing that both DW_AT_data_member_location and DW_AT_data_bit_offs=
et
> need to be taken into consideration, not just one of them.

That was my understanding too.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=