http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
--- Comment #14 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-04-20 17:42:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) > Hm, if line 14 in the testcase is changed to: > > - ((T *) &s.d)[0] = *x; > + ((T *) &s.d)[1] = *x; We should go through insv pattern. Patch v2 attached above.