> Index: gcc/expr.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/expr.c (revision 202778) > +++ gcc/expr.c (working copy) > @@ -9878,7 +9878,7 @@ > && modifier != EXPAND_STACK_PARM > ? target : NULL_RTX), > VOIDmode, > - modifier == EXPAND_SUM ? EXPAND_NORMAL : modifier); > + EXPAND_MEMORY); > > /* If the bitfield is volatile, we want to access it in the > field's mode, not the computed mode. > > context suggests that we may arrive with EXPAND_STACK_PARM here > which is a correctness modifier (see its docs). But I'm not too familiar > with the details of the various expand modifiers, Eric may be though.
Yes, this change looks far too bold and is presumably papering over the underlying issue... > That said, I still believe that fixing the misalign path in > expand_assignment would be better than trying to avoid it. For this > testcase the issue is again that expand_assignment passes the wrong > mode/target to the > movmisalign optab. ...then let's just fix the movmisalign stuff. -- Eric Botcazou
