From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-365151-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29614 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2011 08:28:20 -0000
Received: (qmail 29600 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Aug 2011 08:28:19 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:28:05 +0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/50021] -Wsuggest-attribute=pure makes obviously-incorrect suggestion
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-50021-4-484Ky99pHA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-50021-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-50021-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:28:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg00925.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021

--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-08-09 08:27:16 UTC ---
On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
> 
> --- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-08 20:48:51 UTC ---
> Yep, we need to mark partial clones and supress warnings there. Do we have way
> to work out from DECL if it is a clone? (from callgraph it is bit tricky in
> this case when it comes to ltrans partitioning. For sure I can stick flag there
> through)

I'm not sure - I probably would add a decl flag for this (might be useful
for debug info as well).