From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3341 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2012 15:15:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 3331 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Feb 2012 15:15:52 -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, 14 Feb 2012 15:15:39 +0000 From: "aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/52142] [trans-mem] inlined transaction_pure functions are instrumented Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:15:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 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: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-02/txt/msg01427.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52142 --- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-02-14 15:15:36 UTC --- Created attachment 26659 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26659 proposed patch Actually Richard (rth), the restriction is less strict than that. We are currently disallowing inling of TM_pure functions into TM_safe functions. Should we be disallowing TM_pure functions into non-TM_pure functions? This approach (attached) definitely fixes the PR. Please let me know so I can formally submit this patch. p.s. FYI, the original disallowing came here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg01003.html