> OK. Possibly also qualifies for the branch(es) as wrong-code fix.
Thanks. It's not a regression, but I can indeed put in on recent branches.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 9:57 AM Eric Botcazou via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> most cases of VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRs involving reverse scalar storage order are
> disqualified for SRA because they are storage_order_barrier_p, but you can
> still have a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR to a regular composite type
Hi,
most cases of VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRs involving reverse scalar storage order are
disqualified for SRA because they are storage_order_barrier_p, but you can
still have a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR to a regular composite type being applied to
a component of a record type with reverse scalar storage order,
