Index: cfe/trunk/include/clang/Driver/Options.td =================================================================== --- cfe/trunk/include/clang/Driver/Options.td +++ cfe/trunk/include/clang/Driver/Options.td @@ -1156,7 +1156,7 @@ def ffine_grained_bitfield_accesses : Flag<["-"], "ffine-grained-bitfield-accesses">, Group, Flags<[CC1Option]>, - HelpText<"Use separate accesses for bitfields with legal widths and alignments.">; + HelpText<"Use separate accesses for consecutive bitfield runs with legal widths and alignments.">; def fno_fine_grained_bitfield_accesses : Flag<["-"], "fno-fine-grained-bitfield-accesses">, Group, Flags<[CC1Option]>, HelpText<"Use large-integer access for consecutive bitfield runs.">; Index: cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGRecordLayoutBuilder.cpp =================================================================== --- cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGRecordLayoutBuilder.cpp +++ cfe/trunk/lib/CodeGen/CGRecordLayoutBuilder.cpp @@ -404,19 +404,20 @@ return; } - // Check if current Field is better as a single field run. When current field + // Check if OffsetInRecord is better as a single field run. When OffsetInRecord // has legal integer width, and its bitfield offset is naturally aligned, it // is better to make the bitfield a separate storage component so as it can be // accessed directly with lower cost. - auto IsBetterAsSingleFieldRun = [&](RecordDecl::field_iterator Field) { + auto IsBetterAsSingleFieldRun = [&](uint64_t OffsetInRecord, + uint64_t StartBitOffset) { if (!Types.getCodeGenOpts().FineGrainedBitfieldAccesses) return false; - unsigned Width = Field->getBitWidthValue(Context); - if (!DataLayout.isLegalInteger(Width)) + if (!DataLayout.isLegalInteger(OffsetInRecord)) return false; - // Make sure Field is natually aligned if it is treated as an IType integer. - if (getFieldBitOffset(*Field) % - Context.toBits(getAlignment(getIntNType(Width))) != + // Make sure StartBitOffset is natually aligned if it is treated as an + // IType integer. + if (StartBitOffset % + Context.toBits(getAlignment(getIntNType(OffsetInRecord))) != 0) return false; return true; @@ -435,14 +436,15 @@ Run = Field; StartBitOffset = getFieldBitOffset(*Field); Tail = StartBitOffset + Field->getBitWidthValue(Context); - StartFieldAsSingleRun = IsBetterAsSingleFieldRun(Run); + StartFieldAsSingleRun = IsBetterAsSingleFieldRun(Tail - StartBitOffset, + StartBitOffset); } ++Field; continue; } // If the start field of a new run is better as a single run, or - // if current field is better as a single run, or + // if current field (or consecutive fields) is better as a single run, or // if current field has zero width bitfield and either // UseZeroLengthBitfieldAlignment or UseBitFieldTypeAlignment is set to // true, or @@ -451,7 +453,7 @@ // skip the block below and go ahead to emit the storage. // Otherwise, try to add bitfields to the run. if (!StartFieldAsSingleRun && Field != FieldEnd && - !IsBetterAsSingleFieldRun(Field) && + !IsBetterAsSingleFieldRun(Tail - StartBitOffset, StartBitOffset) && (!Field->isZeroLengthBitField(Context) || (!Context.getTargetInfo().useZeroLengthBitfieldAlignment() && !Context.getTargetInfo().useBitFieldTypeAlignment())) && Index: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/finegrain-bitfield-type.cpp =================================================================== --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/finegrain-bitfield-type.cpp +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/finegrain-bitfield-type.cpp @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple x86_64-linux-gnu -ffine-grained-bitfield-accesses \ +// RUN: -emit-llvm -o - %s | FileCheck %s +struct S4 { + unsigned long f1:28; + unsigned long f2:4; + unsigned long f3:12; +}; +struct S4 a4; + +struct S5 { + unsigned long f1:28; + unsigned long f2:4; + unsigned long f3:28; + unsigned long f4:4; + unsigned long f5:12; +}; +struct S5 a5; + +// CHECK: %struct.S4 = type { i32, i16 } +// CHECK-NOT: %struct.S4 = type { i48 } +// CHECK: %struct.S5 = type { i32, i32, i16, [6 x i8] } +// CHECK-NOT: %struct.S5 = type { i80 } \ No newline at end of file