I'm pretty sure we're dealing with a compiler regression here: note that there isn't actually any usage of bitfields in the test case given (rather, it uses a volatile int), it just so happened that the code to implement -fstrict-volatile-bitfields caused a particular code path to be erroneously executed.
If things are working properly, the compilability of the code shouldn't be affected by the -f[no-]strict-volatile-bitfields options. -- volatile int causes inline assembly build failure https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/675347 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
