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 E2379385781B; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 08:56:10 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E2379385781B
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/102059] Incorrect always_inline diagnostic in LTO mode with
 #pragma GCC target("cpu=power10")
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 08:56:10 +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: 11.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, lto, rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-102059-4-eop6guZvRq@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102059-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102059-4@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: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 08:56:11 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102059

--- Comment #14 from Kewen Lin <linkw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> Note that x86 uses for example
>=20
>   else if (caller_opts->x_ix86_fpmath !=3D callee_opts->x_ix86_fpmath
>            /* If the calle doesn't use FP expressions differences in
>               ix86_fpmath can be ignored.  We are called from FEs
>               for multi-versioning call optimization, so beware of
>               ipa_fn_summaries not available.  */
>            && (! ipa_fn_summaries
>                || ipa_fn_summaries->get (callee_node) =3D=3D NULL
>                || ipa_fn_summaries->get (callee_node)->fp_expressions))
>     ret =3D false;
>=20
> I wonder if we need to give targets the ability to compute IPA inline
> summary bits, like "uses HTM" or "uses intrinsics for ISA X", to
> selectively ignore bits that are not actually used.
>=20

Thanks for the example, it looks useful! Now the field fp_expressions is
generic, one target specific summary class seems required then. And not sur=
e if
the users still have interests/senses to further try flto when they fail to=
 get
expected inlining with some basic optimization options. :)=