From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 9FD633858C1F; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 07:33:17 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9FD633858C1F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1676964797; bh=Dxg6FOcagH8UBVilUGqmvIw54QCw9cPwLrOWNzBAeeY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=JjbBYFf099t/trJMDY2fyUC5SITpCkqx4ZzzTCv7g+9JXD/nyPZsBW22AORdDlgIT 8suhzDQyFtWNeuoureie5/yybGhpWB9vLl01W5gthzIenzWCBZxpvf4DWBdPg1CrH0 4QR1wlf8uBA8xl57Rl4guf1iYwkc3OTEiwZGAy/U= From: "ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp" 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 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ishikawa at yk dot rim.or.jp 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: 12.3 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107931 --- Comment #18 from ishikawa,chiaki --- I reported the issue to the following github for a very fast hashing functi= on 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=20 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(?).=