Richard Guenther <[email protected]> writes:
>> Anyway, the patch I posted previously would risk re-introducing PR
>> 50386 and PR 50326, even though they are very unlikely with just
>> bit-fields. So my current working version is the following, but it
>> causes failure of libmudflap.c++/pass55-frag.cxx execution test so I'm
>> not actually proposing it yet (sigh).
>
> I would not worry about mudflap tests. The patch looks good to my
> eyes.
Are you sure the failure is new? At least for 64-bit at -O,
libmudflap.c++/pass55-frag.cxx already fails right now (cf. PR
libmudflap/49843).
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
