> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com] > > Err, but if you zero-extend directly to the target type you have the > correct result, too.
Yep but in some case we need sign extend (32 bit bitwise OR stored into 64 bit result). As I said, the logic could be simplified by sign extending if load_size == bitwise expression size and zero extending if not true. I'll rework the patch in this direction. > > But nothing for the testsuite? The testcase you add fails foul of > sign-extending the loads. Ack, I'll add a test for zero extension and one for sign extension. Cheers, Thomas
