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.

  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: link
Be 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).