https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #8 from Wilco <wilco at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #7) > without looking in detail, this could > be another middle-end error or the back-end > generating an invalid instruction where no assertions > are, then lra can rewrite the insn in a way that > triggers the assertion later. > > I have no resources to work on reducing this > due to the upcoming OpenSSL release tomorrow, were > I need to work on a fix for a CVE I found. > > Could you pleas help reducing this one? I'll have a go - it bootstraps when I set #define SLOW_BYTE_ACCESS 1. So I'm guessing it's a case of the mid-end emitting an unaligned access for an aligned bitfield eventhough that is neither useful nor optimal.
