https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109992
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2023-05-26
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
After my lowering pass (little-endian) we have:
_1 = BIT_FIELD_REF <_9, 29, 3>;
_2 = (unsigned int) _1;
_3 = _2 + add_7(D);
_4 = (<unnamed-unsigned:29>) _3;
_11 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR <_9, _4, 3 (29 bits)>;
Which I suspect we could pattern match to:
_t = add_7 << 3;
_11 = _9 + _t;
iff 3+29 == 32(int)
Big-endian (with fields a and b swapped order in the source):
_9 = MEM[(struct foo *)p_6(D)];
_1 = BIT_FIELD_REF <_9, 29, 0>;
_2 = (unsigned int) _1;
_3 = _2 + add_7(D);
_4 = (<unnamed-unsigned:29>) _3;
_11 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR <_9, _4, 0 (29 bits)>;
Similar pattern matching, just using 0 for the offset rather than 3 ...
