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 AA0553858C31; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:01:11 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AA0553858C31
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1711558871;
	bh=LQNymjFBU1hgpIQDO+C+KPl/XlFvxRfF+VOeRAWmpoE=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=klZfhnswCS5hUBkIVK9aNitZ+nK538XZ/OW0VmSIvZ3AwfgBSOusa5AtP3uMUi0+0
	 HjW/Y+AnseuDD7vtAsV0waYxEs6mZPMX5ciNmgIFbjcfo/TZNaUkeucAsuBcCxxt8X
	 GvcOeQvH6jCwERayjawQu5WAyqH8qNHDHWGUrzVQ=
From: "jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/114452] Functions invoked through compile-time
 table of function pointers not inlined
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:01:11 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
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: bug_status resolution cf_reconfirmed_on
 everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-114452-4-alMWMxohf9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114452-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114452-4@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=3D114452

Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|DUPLICATE                   |---
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2024-03-27
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This does not look like a duplicate of PR 111573.

Nevertheless, it is not quite obvious what to do here.  Inlining
happens before unrolling and I am not sure we'd consider unrolling in
early optimizations.  And without unrolling, the load from the array
is not easy to fold.

In this testcase all (well, both) functions referenced from the array
are semantically equivalent which is recognized by ICF but making it
be able to pass this information to the inliner would be
non-trivial... and is this the common case worth optimizing for?=