https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66788
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > Not sure what is correct behavior here (Jakub points out mangling ignores > the over-alignment). Even ignoring the over-alignment, const cl_ulong& and cl_ulong& are different types and I think it should be possible to overload on them.