On 12/16/2020 3:30 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 03:15:48PM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote: >> >> I did find one bug, in your step (3), you have a check against >> info->packed on symbol.c:162 in lay_out_struct, but nothing ever set the >> packed value. I think you just need to initialized info->packed from >> sym_packed at the top of examine_struct_union_type, i.e. > > A yes, I see, thank you. I think it was on purpose that it wasn't > yet enabled (things are it fuzzy because the code is ~2 year old) > and as I said it's unfinished. > > But, with your change, does it handles 'packed' more or less > correctly? > > -- Luc > Yes. Obviously we're limited in that we no longer check for out-of-bounds accesses on bitfields, but it at least produces the correct sizes for structures, and avoids the warnings that I was running into. Overall, I think the changes in that branch are solid, and look correct to me. I'm not sure what all the limitations are of having it produce incorrect load/store operations that don't work with the packed bitfields.. but at least for the code I was checking, it seems to be correct now. Thanks, Jake
