ARM/APCS: Don't respect bit-field types when laying out structures.
- This fixes the last known ABI issues with ARM/APCS.
- I've run the first 1k ABITests with '--no-unsigned --no-vector --no-complex'
on {armv6, armv7} x {-mno-thumb, -mthumb}, and the first 10k tests for armv7
-mthumb, for both function return types and single argument calls. These all
pass now (they failed horribly before without --no-bitfield).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@102070 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp b/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp
index b94f55b..6624ed9 100644
--- a/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp
+++ b/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp
@@ -1418,6 +1418,10 @@
DoubleAlign = LongLongAlign = LongDoubleAlign = 32;
SizeType = UnsignedLong;
+ // Do not respect the alignment of bit-field types when laying out
+ // structures. This corresponds to PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS in gcc.
+ UseBitFieldTypeAlignment = false;
+
if (IsThumb) {
DescriptionString = ("e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:32-i8:8:32-i16:16:32-i32:32:32-"
"i64:32:32-f32:32:32-f64:32:32-"