https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58416
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I have two variants of a fix, one that for the testcase in comment#5 avoids
scalarization on i?86-*-* and one that scalarizes into unsigned:96 which
exposes that we fail to constant fold MEM<unsigned:96>["xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"];
On x86-64 with sizeof(long double) == 16 (instead of == 12 with -m32) we
scalarize with uint128_t.
I'm going to test the variant that avoids creating an unsigned:96 integer type
since I think that's safer.
