public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug ipa/107931] [12/13 Regression] -Og causes always_inline to fail since r12-6677-gc952126870c92cf2 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 07:33:15 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-107931-4-36C6ClLoBT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-107931-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107931 --- Comment #18 from ishikawa,chiaki <ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp> --- I reported the issue to the following github for a very fast hashing function library. https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/issues/800 From the discussion there, I figured -Og does not define __NO_INLINE__ as -O0 would define it. Well the discussion refers to the problem mentioned earlier about the same issue. In there, the following mentions something about __NO_INLINE__. https://github.com/Cyan4973/xxHash/pull/720#issuecomment-1414481935 So I settled on manually define __NO_INLINE__ on the compiler command line. This makes it the compilation succeed. (The code seems to be written in such a manner that always_inline is not declared for the two functions if __NO_INLINE__ is defiend.) It would be great if -Og can define macro __NO_INLINE__ as -O0 does. Oh wait, -fno-inline has the same effect(?).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-21 7:33 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-11-30 7:52 [Bug c/107931] New: [12 Regression] -Od causes always_inline to fail me at xenu dot pl 2022-11-30 7:55 ` [Bug c/107931] [12 Regression] -Og " me at xenu dot pl 2022-11-30 12:30 ` [Bug ipa/107931] [12/13 Regression] -Og causes always_inline to fail since r12-6677-gc952126870c92cf2 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-30 12:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 15:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 17:59 ` me at xenu dot pl 2022-12-01 18:02 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 7:22 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2022-12-21 10:44 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-17 10:16 ` sam at gentoo dot org 2023-02-18 6:32 ` ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp 2023-02-18 6:35 ` ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp 2023-02-18 7:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-18 7:10 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-18 23:34 ` ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp 2023-02-20 7:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-20 10:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-20 10:51 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2023-02-21 7:33 ` ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp [this message] 2023-02-21 7:36 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2023-02-21 11:56 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz 2023-05-08 12:26 ` [Bug ipa/107931] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-12 10:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-12 10:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-12 11:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 8:31 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 8:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 10:30 ` rguenther at suse dot de
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-107931-4-36C6ClLoBT@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).