1 files changed, 41 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.5/linaro/gcc-4.5-linaro-r99426.patch b/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.5/linaro/gcc-4.5-linaro-r99426.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..cf06e1ff74
--- /dev/null
+++ b/meta-oe/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.5/linaro/gcc-4.5-linaro-r99426.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+        Backport from mainline:
+
+        gcc/
+        2010-10-26  Jie Zhang  <jie@codesourcery.com>
+
+        * doc/invoke.texi: Improve documentation of
+        -fstrict-volatile-bitfields.
+
+=== modified file 'gcc/doc/invoke.texi'
+--- old/gcc/doc/invoke.texi     2010-11-04 12:43:52 +0000
++++ new/gcc/doc/invoke.texi     2010-11-04 14:29:09 +0000
+@@ -17633,8 +17633,8 @@
+ @opindex fstrict-volatile-bitfields
+ This option should be used if accesses to volatile bitfields (or other
+ structure fields, although the compiler usually honors those types
+-anyway) should use a single access in a mode of the same size as the
+-container's type, aligned to a natural alignment if possible.  For
++anyway) should use a single access of the width of the
++field's type, aligned to a natural alignment if possible.  For
+ example, targets with memory-mapped peripheral registers might require
+ all such accesses to be 16 bits wide; with this flag the user could
+ declare all peripheral bitfields as ``unsigned short'' (assuming short
+@@ -17647,11 +17647,13 @@
+ any portion of the bitfield, or memory-mapped registers unrelated to
+ the one being updated.
+ 
+-If the target requires strict alignment, and honoring the container
++If the target requires strict alignment, and honoring the field
+ type would require violating this alignment, a warning is issued.
+-However, the access happens as the user requested, under the
+-assumption that the user knows something about the target hardware
+-that GCC is unaware of.
++If the field has @code{packed} attribute, the access is done without
++honoring the field type.  If the field doesn't have @code{packed}
++attribute, the access is done honoring the field type.  In both cases,
++GCC assumes that the user knows something about the target hardware
++that it is unaware of.
+ 
+ The default value of this option is determined by the application binary
+ interface for the target processor.
+