[Bug target/110611] X86 is not honouring POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED in m32 code.

2023-07-10 Thread iains at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110611 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/110611] X86 is not honouring POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED in m32 code.

2023-07-10 Thread amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110611 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Com

[Bug target/110611] X86 is not honouring POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED in m32 code.

2023-07-10 Thread iains at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110611 --- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #3) > uint64_t is neither Pmode nor word_mode here. POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED is > only relevant if POINTER_SIZE is narrower than Pmode. So, just pilot-error, then?

[Bug target/110611] X86 is not honouring POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED in m32 code.

2023-07-10 Thread schwab--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110611 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab --- uint64_t is neither Pmode nor word_mode here. POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED is only relevant if POINTER_SIZE is narrower than Pmode.

[Bug target/110611] X86 is not honouring POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED in m32 code.

2023-07-10 Thread iains at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110611 --- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #0) > the x86 backend sets: > gcc/config/i386/i386.h:#define POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED 1 > which ought, according to gccint mean that pointers get sign-extended... erm I

[Bug target/110611] X86 is not honouring POINTERS_EXTEND_UNSIGNED in m32 code.

2023-07-10 Thread iains at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110611 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Target||x86_64-linux-gnu, |