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"),

Reply via email to