From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 78D03388A414; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:25:46 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 78D03388A414
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/101279] Function attributes often block inlining
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:25:46 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: documentation, missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-101279-4-SVUxZYRGkt@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-101279-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-101279-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 13:25:46 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101279

--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
> Am 28.06.2022 um 14:53 schrieb david at westcontrol dot com <gcc-bugzilla=
@gcc.gnu.org>:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFhttps://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101279
>=20
> --- Comment #5 from David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
>> (In reply to frankhb1989 from comment #3)
>>> There is a more specific instance here: can_inline_edge_by_limits_p in
>>> ipa-inline.cc treats flags and "optimize" attributes differently.
>>=20
>> A bit up there's a blacklist we maintain where inlining is not OK becaus=
e it
>> results in semantic differences.
>>=20
>> Generally we it's hard to second-guess the users intention when looking
>> at an inline edge with different optimization settings of caller and cal=
lee.
>> For C++ comdats there might be even multiple variants with different
>> optimization level (but we only keep one, special-casing this a bit).
>=20
> I appreciate the "err on the side of caution" attitude.  Perhaps there co=
uld be
> an extra "I know what I'm doing" attribute that lets you override the
> blacklisting in a particular case.  This would only really make sense in =
cases
> where the attribute can be attached to the expressions and statements wit=
hin
> the function (I think "-fwrapv" would be in this category).  In cases whe=
re
> this is not possible, an error or warning message would be in order as the
> compiler can't do what the programmer is asking.

Can you provide a specific example that you would allow this way?


> --=20
> You are receiving this mail because:
> You are on the CC list for the bug.=