http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60553
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Another idea would be (many next-variant walks in the call stack) Index: lto/lto-tree.h =================================================================== --- lto/lto-tree.h (revision 208615) +++ lto/lto-tree.h (working copy) @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ enum lto_tree_node_structure_enum { }; union GTY((desc ("lto_tree_node_structure (&%h)"), - chain_next ("CODE_CONTAINS_STRUCT (TREE_CODE (&%h.generic), TS_COMMON) ? ((union lang_tree_node *) TREE_CHAIN (&%h.generic)) : NULL"))) + chain_next ("CODE_CONTAINS_STRUCT (TREE_CODE (&%h.generic), TS_TYPE_COMMON) ? ((union lang_tree_node *) TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT (&%h.generic)) : CODE_CONTAINS_STRUCT (TREE_CODE (&%h.generic), TS_COMMON) ? ((union lang_tree_node *) TREE_CHAIN (&%h.generic)) : NULL"))) lang_tree_node { union tree_node GTY ((tag ("TS_LTO_GENERIC"),