http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-06-24 10:24:36 UTC --- Created attachment 24590 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24590 gcc47-pr46400.patch This seems to fix it for me, otherwise untested. TREE_CHAIN for types, if I understand it right, is either NULL, or contains TYPE_DECL, so IMHO it doesn't make much sense to consider it as chain_next. Even if the TYPE_DECL has a long TYPE_CHAIN itself, that long chain would be handled when handling the TYPE_DECL, so would result in at most one extra frame. But TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT is potentially long chain.
