https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=124804
--- Comment #22 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #20) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18) > > So, I think there is some misunderstanding between the backend and RA on > > endianity, what actually > > (subreg:V16QI (reg:OO) 16) > > and > > (subreg:V16QI (reg:OO) 0) > > mean for ppc64le and what it means on > > (subreg:V16QI (mem:OO) 16) > > and > > (subreg:V16QI (mem:OO) 0) > > That sounds convincing! Is there any obvious wrong pattern? And/or can > you try this on correct-endian as well, see if it works there? When I left IBM in May, we did have a Power10 running in BE mode. I think this will take an IBMer to test that configuration.
