[Bug middle-end/71509] Bitfield causes load hit store with larger store than load

[luoxhu at cn dot ibm.com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71509

--- Comment #10 from Xiong Hu XS Luo <luoxhu at cn dot ibm.com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #8)
> > On Fri, 15 Mar 2019, luoxhu at cn dot ibm.com wrote:
> > 
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71509
> > > 
> > > Xiong Hu XS Luo <luoxhu at cn dot ibm.com> changed:
> > > 
> > >            What    |Removed                     |Added
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >                  CC|                            |guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org,
> > >                    |                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
> > > 
> > > --- Comment #7 from Xiong Hu XS Luo <luoxhu at cn dot ibm.com> ---
> > > Hi Richard, trying to figure out the issue recently, but get some questions
> > > need your help. How is the status of the "proposed simple lowering of bitfield
> > > accesses on GIMPLE", please? 
> > 
> > There are finished patches in a few variants but all of them show issues
> > in the testsuite, mostly around missed optimizations IIRC.  It has been
> > quite some time since I last looked at this but IIRC Andrew Pinski said
> > he's got sth for GCC 10 so you might want to ask him.
> 
> Yes I do, I am planing on submitting the new pass once GCC 10 has opened up.

Hi Pinski, is your patch upstreamed to GCC 10 please?  Thanks.