https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108941
--- Comment #9 from jbeulich at suse dot com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > How does that look like a gcc bug? It is either a binutils bug for not > accepting it anymore, or ffmpeg-4 bug for relying on the negative shifts. While I'm not sure in how far reduction from original code has discarded too much context, the impression I'm getting is that they use inline assembly because if the same way expressed in a similar way in C, the compiler would warn. And then, rather than making the expression match C standard requirements, assembly code was used instead to silence that diagnostic.
