From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id E52913858D28; Sun, 17 Sep 2023 06:19:07 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E52913858D28
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1694931547;
	bh=UYsU8x3vGiAqJ7tUeVwG3h9fzbcCd/RdkyREPpyOYDI=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=lY99bLWsgXDYYx7APjzhyjHeASwjEJ/qL9TlGr09B7NjE/vVf2ZMkTRi/w+B5ITMZ
	 W0T/sIasmFdsJpctlL1t+LClBa+tqiWXlk1koWA/BZl1yl/LsryD7hU42KH6K1FIZF
	 g/J1cCof3qNGFVN79v9PyT/3vjLJbpUx1lmQ9Txw=
From: "gb2985 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/111437] Some always inline functions are incorrectly warn
 of as "might not be inlinable"
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2023 06:19:07 +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: 13.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: gb2985 at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-111437-4-iVnxPWUy3E@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111437-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111437-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111437

--- Comment #2 from zxuiji <gb2985 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Can you attach the preprocessed source where the warning is and the exact
> command line you are using to invoke gcc?
>=20
> I suspect the issue is that the function can be overridden due to use of
> -fPIC or something smilar to that.

Bugzilla wouldn't let me upload it, too big apparently, did it to my google
drive instead:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16NiT5eWvj_B7QTz5E4zlST6sDCS67HWp/view?usp=
=3Dsharing

Found the function at line 12375, still the division I expected, would've b=
een
shocked had it been otherwise given it's just division of a allocation size=
 by
an element size=