Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu, powerpc64-linux-gnu and mipsisa64-elf. Also tested by making sure that there were no changes in assembly output for a set of gcc .ii files. On the other hand, the -march=octeon output for a set of mips64-linux-gnu gcc .ii files showed the optimisation kicking in as hoped.
This sequence of patches caused a regression in gcc.target/arm/volatile-bitfields-1.c . I haven't reviewed the patch stack in great detail yet, but it looks like this sequence of patches doesn't take the ARM volatile bitfields into account. (193600 is fine, 193606 is not).
regards, Ramana
Richard
