https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15826
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org> --- My preference is to see the test properly resolved. :) I don't think you should just XFAIL the powerpc64le case without understanding why it fails, as that tends to leave the XFAIL in place forever. Here is pr15826.c.211t.optimized on powerpc64le with -O2. Hopefully that will help you see what's going on. Please let me know if there is other data I can gather that will be useful. Thanks! Bill ;; Function foo (foo, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=2355, cgraph_uid=0, symbol_order=0) foo (struct s * p) { unsigned int _4; unsigned int _5; unsigned int _7; <bb 2>: _4 = BIT_FIELD_REF <*p_3(D), 32, 0>; _5 = _4 & 1; _7 = _5; return _7; } ;; Function bar (bar, funcdef_no=1, decl_uid=2358, cgraph_uid=1, symbol_order=1) bar (struct s * p) { <unnamed-unsigned:1> _3; unsigned int _4; <bb 2>: _3 = p_2(D)->bit; _4 = (unsigned int) _3; return _4; } ;; Function andrew (andrew, funcdef_no=2, decl_uid=2361, cgraph_uid=2, symbol_order=2) andrew (struct s * p) { unsigned int _4; unsigned int _5; unsigned int _6; <bb 2>: _4 = BIT_FIELD_REF <*p_3(D), 32, 0>; _5 = _4 & 1; _6 = _5; return _6; }