[Bug c/40404] Comparison involving unsigned int:17 bitfield seems wrong

2009-06-13 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-06-13 13:56 ---
Thanks.  I'll have a look.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2009-06-13 13:56:16
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40404

[Bug c/40404] Comparison involving unsigned int:17 bitfield seems wrong

2009-06-12 Thread mikpe at it dot uu dot se 


--- Comment #4 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se  2009-06-12 20:41 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
 Can someone identify the patch that fixed that on the trunk?

I've identified r139702, the fix for PR37005, as the revision which fixed this
test case on gcc-4.4. That change applies easily to current gcc-4.3, so I tried
it and it did fix this test case also for gcc-4.3.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40404

[Bug c/40404] Comparison involving unsigned int:17 bitfield seems wrong

2009-06-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-06-10 18:41 ---
unsigned int:17  gets promoted to int IIRC.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40404

[Bug c/40404] Comparison involving unsigned int:17 bitfield seems wrong

2009-06-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-06-10 20:15 ---
This has been fixed in GCC 4.4, likely by removing some shorten-compare stuff
in the frontend.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
   ||org
  Known to fail||4.3.3
  Known to work||4.4.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40404

[Bug c/40404] Comparison involving unsigned int:17 bitfield seems wrong

2009-06-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-06-10 20:25 ---
Can someone identify the patch that fixed that on the trunk?


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||wrong-code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40404