From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11827 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2012 20:41:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 11778 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Aug 2012 20:41:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:41:21 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q7MKfKeg002964 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:41:20 -0400 Received: from psique (ovpn-113-26.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.26]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q7MKfHnY028721; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:41:18 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: Michael Eager , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] bitpos: Expand type_field_bitpos to LONGEST and type.length to ULONGEST References: <20120805005359.2dc3edc0@spoyarek> <501E5C33.1020808@eagerm.com> <20120806083524.08b39f37@spoyarek> X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:41:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Sergio Durigan Junior's message of "Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:15:39 -0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-08/txt/msg00638.txt.bz2 On Wednesday, August 22 2012, I wrote: > Another issue I found, specifically on i386 RHEL 5.8 (gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 > 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-52)): > > (gdb) print e^M > $1 = 4294967295^M > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/enumval.exp: print e > print f^M > $2 = -1152921504606846976^M > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/enumval.exp: print f > print J^M > $3 = J^M > (gdb) PASS: gdb.base/enumval.exp: print J > print K^M > $4 = ^M > (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/enumval.exp: print K > > I still haven't debugged further to see what's happening, and I also > haven't tested on a newer GCC (it can be a compiler bug, as you may > remember from our last talk). I will come back if I have more info. I tested this with gcc HEAD, and the test fully passes. Thanks, -- Sergio