From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2545 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2002 22:27:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2458 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2002 22:27:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Jan 2002 22:27:00 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (totem.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.242]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA13307; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 14:26:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3C587324.167DED85@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 14:27:00 -0000 From: Fernando Nasser Organization: Red Hat , Inc. - Toronto X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.7-10smp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Neil Booth CC: Geoff Keating , Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: 6 GCC regressions, 6 new, with your patch on 2002-01-29T19:24:37Z. References: <200201292158.g0TLw6f14961@maat.cygnus.com> <20020129222235.GA4190@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> <20020129233808.GA4967@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> <200201300518.g0U5ICY25065@desire.geoffk.org> <20020130201849.GB11985@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00786.txt.bz2 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