This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug tree-optimization/15826] don't use "if" to extract a single bit bit-field.


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826

--- Comment #14 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)

Thank your for catching it.  I did actually read all the comments.  The trouble
is that there are several test cases here and I missed the one in the second
half of comment #6 (the first half of the comment doesn't seem to apply
anymore, at least not on x86_64).

(In reply to Bill Seurer from comment #13)

You're right, the test fails on powerpc64le (though as far as I can see not on
any other target with reported test results).  It seems like a useful test
despite the above so rather than backing it out entirely I could disable it for
powerpc64le until it's analyzed.

Bill (Seurer or Schmidt), does either of you have a preference for how to
handle the failure?

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]