Re: 6 GCC regressions, 6 new, with your patch on 2002-01-29T19:24:37Z.

Re: 6 GCC regressions, 6 new, with your patch on 2002-01-29T19:24:37Z.

[Neil Booth]

Geoff Keating wrote:-

> Hmmm.  Actually, the first test, bitfields.exp, produces the warnings;

Hi Geoff,

This patch should fix the warnings.  I'll turn my attention to the enum
issue once I've got rth's Alpha issue sorted (I've got some ideas about
that, but I'm just building a cross-compiler to try and reproduce the
situation).

I think this patch makes the tests do what they were supposed to do
previously, but without warnings.  I'd appreciate if you or someone
with write access to GDB would apply it.

Thanks,

Neil.

	* testsuite/gdb.base/bitfields.c: Correct assignments to
	bitfields to avoid warnings.

Index: bitfields.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/bitfields.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1.1.2 bitfields.c
--- bitfields.c	1999/06/28 16:02:40	1.1.1.2
+++ bitfields.c	2002/01/30 20:10:35
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ int main ()
   break1 ();
   flags.uc = 0;
 
-  flags.s1 = 1;
+  flags.s1 = -1;
   break1 ();
   flags.s1 = 0;
 
@@ -131,10 +131,10 @@ int main ()
   flags.u3 = 0;
   flags.u9 = 0;
 
-  flags.s1 = 0x1;
-  flags.s2 = 0x3;
-  flags.s3 = 0x7;
-  flags.s9 = 0x1FF;
+  flags.s1 = -1;
+  flags.s2 = -1;
+  flags.s3 = -1;
+  flags.s9 = -1;
   flags.sc = 0xFF;
   break2 ();
   flags.s1 = 0;
@@ -169,20 +169,20 @@ int main ()
   break4 ();
 
   /* Maximally negative values */
-  flags.s1 = 0x1;
-  flags.s2 = 0x2;
-  flags.s3 = 0x4;
-  flags.s9 = 0x100;
+  flags.s1 = -0x1;
+  flags.s2 = -0x2;
+  flags.s3 = -0x4;
+  flags.s9 = -0x100;
   /* Extract bitfield value so that bitfield.exp can check if the target
      understands signed bitfields.  */
   i = flags.s9;
   break4 ();
 
   /* -1 */
-  flags.s1 = 0x1;
-  flags.s2 = 0x3;
-  flags.s3 = 0x7;
-  flags.s9 = 0x1FF;
+  flags.s1 = -1;
+  flags.s2 = -1;
+  flags.s3 = -1;
+  flags.s9 = -1;
   break4 ();
 
   flags.s1 = 0;

Re: 6 GCC regressions, 6 new, with your patch on 2002-01-29T19:24:37Z.

[Fernando Nasser]

This is approved.  I will try and find some time to check
this in before the end of the week.

(unless someone wants to check it in for me ;-) please use
the From: convention to give Neil the credits).

Thanks for the patch.

Regards,
Fernando


Neil Booth wrote:
> 
> Geoff Keating wrote:-
> 
> > Hmmm.  Actually, the first test, bitfields.exp, produces the warnings;
> 
> Hi Geoff,
> 
> This patch should fix the warnings.  I'll turn my attention to the enum
> issue once I've got rth's Alpha issue sorted (I've got some ideas about
> that, but I'm just building a cross-compiler to try and reproduce the
> situation).
> 
> I think this patch makes the tests do what they were supposed to do
> previously, but without warnings.  I'd appreciate if you or someone
> with write access to GDB would apply it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Neil.
> 
>         * testsuite/gdb.base/bitfields.c: Correct assignments to
>         bitfields to avoid warnings.
> 
> Index: bitfields.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/bitfields.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.1.1.2
> diff -u -p -r1.1.1.2 bitfields.c
> --- bitfields.c 1999/06/28 16:02:40     1.1.1.2
> +++ bitfields.c 2002/01/30 20:10:35
> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ int main ()
>    break1 ();
>    flags.uc = 0;
> 
> -  flags.s1 = 1;
> +  flags.s1 = -1;
>    break1 ();
>    flags.s1 = 0;
> 
> @@ -131,10 +131,10 @@ int main ()
>    flags.u3 = 0;
>    flags.u9 = 0;
> 
> -  flags.s1 = 0x1;
> -  flags.s2 = 0x3;
> -  flags.s3 = 0x7;
> -  flags.s9 = 0x1FF;
> +  flags.s1 = -1;
> +  flags.s2 = -1;
> +  flags.s3 = -1;
> +  flags.s9 = -1;
>    flags.sc = 0xFF;
>    break2 ();
>    flags.s1 = 0;
> @@ -169,20 +169,20 @@ int main ()
>    break4 ();
> 
>    /* Maximally negative values */
> -  flags.s1 = 0x1;
> -  flags.s2 = 0x2;
> -  flags.s3 = 0x4;
> -  flags.s9 = 0x100;
> +  flags.s1 = -0x1;
> +  flags.s2 = -0x2;
> +  flags.s3 = -0x4;
> +  flags.s9 = -0x100;
>    /* Extract bitfield value so that bitfield.exp can check if the target
>       understands signed bitfields.  */
>    i = flags.s9;
>    break4 ();
> 
>    /* -1 */
> -  flags.s1 = 0x1;
> -  flags.s2 = 0x3;
> -  flags.s3 = 0x7;
> -  flags.s9 = 0x1FF;
> +  flags.s1 = -1;
> +  flags.s2 = -1;
> +  flags.s3 = -1;
> +  flags.s9 = -1;
>    break4 ();
> 
>    flags.s1 = 0;

-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto                       E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9

Re: 6 GCC regressions, 6 new, with your patch on 2002-01-29T19:24:37Z.

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 05:26:44PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> This is approved.  I will try and find some time to check
> this in before the end of the week.
> 
> (unless someone wants to check it in for me ;-) please use
> the From: convention to give Neil the credits).

Checked in.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer