https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71917
Matthew Fortune <matthew.fortune at imgtec dot com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |matthew.fortune at imgtec dot com --- Comment #2 from Matthew Fortune <matthew.fortune at imgtec dot com> --- Hi Rainer, Sorry for the bugs, I am however tempted to say this will turn out to be a libffi bug. You have described the same failure mode as I fixed for MIPS but libjava is now following the ffi return type rules so my assumption is that it is sparc ffi that is not. I've had a quick read of sparc ffi code and it seems there is a chance that integer return types are not being promoted to word size. I.e. following the ffi rule that integers smaller than a word are returned as type ffi_arg. Do you know if the two new testcases fail if built against a gij built without my changes to java/lang/reflect/natVMProxy.cc and interpret-run.cc? I suspect they may actually pass before but for the wrong reasons. Does 64-bit sparc have problems with other codebases using ffi? libguile, python being some notable examples? Matthew