https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103316
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7) > > I still think it would be best if Gimple did *never* split data. It > > simply does not know enough about the machine and what the eventual > > machine code will be like to do so advantageously. This is the kind > > of thing that RTL can do much better, is much better positioned to do > > (and in fact it does do this, in all subregN passes). > > Well, we need to be able to RTL expand the GIMPLE and vector lowering > will ensure we can. Otherwise we'll just ICE ;) Aha. But RTL can handle this itself already. There is just a pass ordering problem maybe?
