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.

Reply via email to