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 c++/109753] [13/14 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor)
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 08:09:53 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-109753-4-FkwYPd9Spj@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-109753-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753

--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think the issue might be that whoever is creating
__static_initialization_and_destruction_0 fails to honor the active
target pragma.  Which means back to my suggestion to have multiple ones
when different target options are on the individual CTORs and any of them
have always-inline (with always-inline we can't rely on an out-of-line copy
to exist).

Yes, for libstdc++ purposes which seems to get more and more "always-inline"
it would be good to have a different attribute that would only cause to
disregard inline limits and not have "always-inline" semantics.

[[inline_without_limits]] or [[inline_no_limits]]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-01-11  8:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-05 21:30 [Bug c++/109753] New: pragma GCC target stops std::vector from compiling magnus.hegdahl at gmail dot com
2023-05-05 21:36 ` [Bug target/109753] [13/14 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-05 21:43 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-05 22:38 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-05 22:44 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-05 22:48 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-06  0:12 ` [Bug target/109753] [13/14 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor) pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-08  7:04 ` [Bug c++/109753] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-15 22:41 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-15 22:43 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-17  8:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-27  9:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-10 17:35 ` jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-10 19:02 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-11  8:09 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2024-01-11 12:59 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2024-02-14 22:13 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-14 20:34 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-08 13:46 ` [Bug c++/109753] [13/14/15 " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-21  9:14 ` jakub 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-109753-4-FkwYPd9Spj@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).