https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107465
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I have not tested this at all but I suspect this patch will fix the issue:
apinski@xeond:~/src/upstream-gcc/gcc/gcc/c-family$ git diff c-warn.cc
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-warn.cc b/gcc/c-family/c-warn.cc
index 6742f447ff5..44d16111370 100644
--- a/gcc/c-family/c-warn.cc
+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-warn.cc
@@ -2302,8 +2302,8 @@ warn_for_sign_compare (location_t location,
sop = fold_for_warn (sop);
uop = fold_for_warn (uop);
- STRIP_TYPE_NOPS (sop);
- STRIP_TYPE_NOPS (uop);
+ STRIP_SIGN_NOPS (sop);
+ STRIP_SIGN_NOPS (uop);
base_type = (TREE_CODE (result_type) == COMPLEX_TYPE
? TREE_TYPE (result_type) : result_type);
------ CUT ----
And if it does, then I was right on the reason why typedef vs using unsigned
short directly too.
