On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 09:39:56PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > No, but if there is none left why would you want to "fix" SRA?
>
> As expected, it seems that the make_ssa_name_fn kludge is not sufficient, so
> I'm proposing to disable the PR65310 one-liner for selected targets, using
> the
> function_arg_boundary hook, until after we have a clear way out of this mess.
How does that help? Testcases have been posted multiple times that show
that if targets look at type alignment of non-aggregate types, they have
just broken argument passing, so conditionally reverting the tree-sra
improvements can't help.
Jakub
