> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux (neither of which
> is WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS target), tested on the testcase using
> cross to riscv64-linux but don't have an easy access to a
> WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS target to bootstrap/regtest it there.
>
> Ok for trunk?
Yes, thanks
Hi!
As discussed in the PR, the following testcase is miscompiled on RISC-V
64-bit, because num_sign_bit_copies in one spot pretends the bits in
a paradoxical SUBREG beyond SUBREG_REG SImode are all sign bit copies:
5444 /* For paradoxical SUBREGs on machines where all register