https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110867
--- Comment #10 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #9) > It looks like as if the first fix didn't entirely solve the problem. It > turns out that the normal form of const_int is not always met. Before > releasing a new patch, could you test it first in order to make sure that I > do not break bootstrapping again. I already gave it a try against the > reproducer but would like to make sure that the whole bootstrap is > successful. Hi Stefan, I bootstrapped+tested your patch from Comment 8 on arm, and it seems OK. Thanks, Prathamesh
