> True, but the compiler bug is in the backends - it just now gets > exposed more easily (read: w/o user intervention).
As far as I can see there are no problematic types in the source code, i.e. it's plain ANSI C, so we shouldn't be creating types with non-canonical alignment from that. > Doesn't "fix" the same issue popping up in other passes. Which pass does the alignment promotion? Maybe it's the one to be fixed. -- Eric Botcazou
