Hi,

This patch fixes constant folding of BIT_INSER_EXPR for BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN targets.

Regression tested on aarch64be-none-elf.

Almost committed this as obvious, but I wanted to double check the testcase with a maintainer. I decided to not make the test be big-endian specific, nor to add any specific checks, since before this patch it would abort on a big-endian target and fail an execution test. Just thought that anything else might end up being somewhat sensitive to testisms.

OK for trunk?


gcc/ChangeLog:

        PR middle-end/116997
        * fold-const.cc (fold_ternary_loc): Fix BIT_INSERT_EXPR constant folding
        for BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN targets.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * gcc.dg/vect/pr116997.c: New test.

Co-author: Andrew Pinski <quic_apin...@quicinc.com>
diff --git a/gcc/fold-const.cc b/gcc/fold-const.cc
index 
0578f42ac0c51566efe5eb8f75e645518642728c..6f73f648b70c4947fc9f26741ce099f8b9de8022
 100644
--- a/gcc/fold-const.cc
+++ b/gcc/fold-const.cc
@@ -13712,6 +13712,8 @@ fold_ternary_loc (location_t loc, enum tree_code code, 
tree type,
        {
          unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT bitpos = tree_to_uhwi (op2);
          unsigned bitsize = TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (arg1));
+         if (BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN)
+           bitpos = TYPE_PRECISION (type) - bitpos - bitsize;
          wide_int tem = (wi::to_wide (arg0)
                          & wi::shifted_mask (bitpos, bitsize, true,
                                              TYPE_PRECISION (type)));
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr116997.c 
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr116997.c
new file mode 100644
index 
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4563fc2bfb6f86d4e8adc7160b71760003479c9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr116997.c
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+/* PR 116997.  */
+struct S0
+{
+  unsigned f0;
+  signed f2 : 11;
+  signed : 6;
+} GlobS, *Ptr = &GlobS;
+
+const struct S0 Initializer = {7, 3};
+
+int main (void)
+{
+  for (unsigned i = 0; i <= 2; i++)
+    *Ptr = Initializer;
+  if (GlobS.f2 != 3)
+    __builtin_abort ();
+  return 0;
+}

Reply via email to