From patchwork Tue Jan 11 16:01:13 2011 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Kai Tietz X-Patchwork-Id: 78401 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AEC4CB70A9 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 03:01:36 +1100 (EST) Received: (qmail 7189 invoked by alias); 11 Jan 2011 16:01:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 7044 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jan 2011 16:01:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RFC_ABUSE_POST X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-qw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 16:01:16 +0000 Received: by qwi2 with SMTP id 2so5183098qwi.20 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 08:01:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.192.149 with SMTP id dq21mr15145317qcb.57.1294761673684; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 08:01:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.214.131 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 08:01:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 17:01:13 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch java]: Intialize va_list_type_node to avoid segfault for x86_64 targets in respect for alignment From: Kai Tietz To: Andreas Schwab Cc: GCC Patches , Andrew Haley X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 2011/1/11 Andreas Schwab : > Kai Tietz writes: > >> Following patch should solve your issue: > > It doesn't. > > Andreas. > > -- > Andreas Schwab, schwab@redhat.com > GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84  5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E > "And now for something completely different." > Yes, it uses also the unsigned_short_type_node ... Here a bunch of missing type-node initializers. Could you please test again? Thanks in advance, Kai Index: decl.c =================================================================== --- decl.c (revision 168662) +++ decl.c (working copy) @@ -1154,8 +1154,14 @@ = add_builtin_function ("_Jv_remJ", t, 0, NOT_BUILT_IN, NULL, NULL_TREE); /* Initialize va_list_type_node. */ + unsigned_char_type_node = make_unsigned_type (CHAR_TYPE_SIZE); + short_integer_type_node = make_signed_type (SHORT_TYPE_SIZE); + short_unsigned_type_node = make_unsigned_type (SHORT_TYPE_SIZE); unsigned_type_node = make_unsigned_type (INT_TYPE_SIZE); long_integer_type_node = make_signed_type (LONG_TYPE_SIZE); + long_unsigned_type_node = make_unsigned_type (LONG_TYPE_SIZE); + long_long_integer_type_node = make_signed_type (LONG_LONG_TYPE_SIZE); + long_long_unsigned_type_node = make_unsigned_type (LONG_LONG_TYPE_SIZE); t = targetm.build_builtin_va_list ();