On 9/1/22 3:29 AM, Kewen.Lin wrote: >> I have no idea why ptr_vector_*_type would behave differently here than >> build_pointer_type (vector_*_type_node). Using the build_pointer_type() >> fixed it for me, so that's why I went with it. :-) Maybe this is a bug >> in lto??? > > Thanks for your time to reproduce this! > > The only difference is that ptr_vector_*_type are built from the > qualified_type based on vector_*_type_node, instead of directly from > vector_*_type_node. I'm interested to have a further look at this later.
If you look into this, please let me know. I'd like to know what you find out. Peter
