public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/103989] [12 regression] std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-unitialized at -Og since r12-1992-g6feb628a706e86eb Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 13:58:58 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-103989-4-3VzDTksQfO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-103989-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103989 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to hubicka from comment #12) > > Yeah, and since we inline all always inline and also flatten during > > early inline the IPA inliner should really do nothing. > > OK, can_inline_edge_p will do that but we will still walk the calls > which is bit of wasted effort. Will look into that incrementally. > > > > > It may be nice to also avoid re-analyzing functions completely to save > > > some compile time, but that may be bit tricky if we decide to do things > > > like cross-module always_inline. I will look into that too, but perhaps > > > that can wait for next stage1. > > > > I think we decided to have all always inline early and drop bodies now, > > didn't you patch it that way this stage1? > I think that gets into trouble i.e. with kernel calling always_inlines > indirectly. It is a mess... Sure - I just remember (falsely?) that we finally decided to do it :) If we don't run IPA inline we don't figure we failed to inline the always_inline either ;) And IPA inline can expose more indirect alywas-inlines we only discover after even more optimization so the issue is really moot unless we sorry () (or link-fail). > > > > IIRC the CCP was necessary for some odd reason I don't remember > > right now ;) > > I would bet it was builtin_constat_p and inlining, so perhaps if we > completely ban late inlining ccp can go. Yeah, or __builtin_unreachable, or whatever ;) > > > > > Looking into what passes are in the pipeline I also noticed that > > > we could also probably skip late modref from -Og optimization pipeline. > > > > Yes, I noticed it was there just now ... > > I will make patch to drop it for trunk. If we disable all optimization > the repeated pure-const seems pointless as well? Yes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-13 13:58 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-01-12 12:10 [Bug tree-optimization/103989] New: [12 regression] std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-unitialized at -Og marc@nieper-wisskirchen.de 2022-01-12 12:16 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103989] [12 regression] std::optional and bogus -Wmaybe-unitialized at -Og since r12-1992-g6feb628a706e86eb marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-12 12:54 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-12 17:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-12 19:11 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-13 11:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-13 11:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-13 11:56 ` Jan Hubicka 2022-01-13 11:56 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2022-01-13 12:03 ` Jan Hubicka 2022-01-13 12:03 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2022-01-13 12:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-13 13:39 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2022-01-13 13:44 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2022-01-13 13:55 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2022-01-13 13:58 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-01-13 14:11 ` Jan Hubicka 2022-01-13 14:11 ` hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz 2022-01-13 15:01 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-13 15:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-13 15:10 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2022-01-18 12:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-18 14:43 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-18 14:43 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-01-18 14:43 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-103989-4-3VzDTksQfO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).