https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96983
--- Comment #13 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #12)
> Here's how the types align:
>
> kind mode_precision c_long_double c_float128
> x86 long double 10 80 1 0
> x86 __float128 16 128 0 1
> sparc long double 16 128 1 0
This may lead to a total mess, and I am unable to test it, but can you try:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-types.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-types.c
index 26fdb2803a7..4d5de9066af 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-types.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-types.c
@@ -844,7 +844,14 @@ gfc_build_real_type (gfc_real_info *info)
if (mode_precision == DOUBLE_TYPE_SIZE)
info->c_double = 1;
if (mode_precision == LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE_SIZE)
- info->c_long_double = 1;
+ {
+ info->c_long_double = 1;
+ if (mode_precision == 128)
+ {
+ info->c_float128 = 1;
+ gfc_real16_is_float128 = true;
+ }
+ }
if (mode_precision != LONG_DOUBLE_TYPE_SIZE && mode_precision == 128)
{
info->c_float128 = 1;
It's likely to screw up power completely, but I don't have any feedback from
them.
