https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114289
--- Comment #3 from Dan Stahlke ---
Variants that generate more reasonable results:
struct foo {
int x:32;
} __attribute__((packed));
struct foo {
int x:16;
} __attribute__((packed));
struct foo {
int x:31;
};
struct foo {
in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114289
Dan Stahlke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-linux-gnu|
Keywords|missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114289
Bug ID: 114289
Summary: Non-optimal assembly for accessing bit-fields in
packed structs
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
--- Comment #25 from Dan Stahlke ---
The test case I just posted appears in the bug 105651 discussion. So maybe or
maybe not related to the present discussion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105329
Dan Stahlke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dan at stahlke dot org
--- Comment #24 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106893
Bug ID: 106893
Summary: auto deduces wrong type for function pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102970
Bug ID: 102970
Summary: stable_sort uninitialized value with -funroll-loops
-fno-tree-vectorize
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
