I just noticed we have a spare flag bit in gimple_statement_base
which causes subcode to start at bit 15 with consequences for
code-generation on the very frequent accesses to this field. Oops.
This is a regression from 4.6 which has
/* Padding to get subcode to 16 bit alignment. */
unsigned pad : 1;
eeeh ...
This is caused by improper reversion of
2012-02-28 Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com>
PR middle-end/51752
* gimple.h (gimple_in_transaction): New.
(gimple_set_in_transaction): New.
(struct gimple_statement_base): Add in_transaction field.
Committed to all affected branches as obvious.
Richard.
2014-04-01 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
* gimple.h (struct gimple_statement_base): Align subcode to
16 bits.
Index: gcc/gimple.h
===================================================================
--- gcc/gimple.h (revision 208975)
+++ gcc/gimple.h (working copy)
@@ -166,6 +166,9 @@ struct GTY((desc ("gimple_statement_stru
/* Nonzero if this statement contains volatile operands. */
unsigned has_volatile_ops : 1;
+ /* Unused. Make sure to align subcode to 16 bits. */
+ unsigned pad : 1;
+
/* The SUBCODE field can be used for tuple-specific flags for tuples
that do not require subcodes. Note that SUBCODE should be at
least as wide as tree codes, as several tuples store tree codes
