public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/62051] [4.9/5 Regression] Undefined reference to vtable with -O2 and -fdevirtualize-speculatively
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 23:20:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-62051-4-2GWBsyGhds@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-62051-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62051
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
>
> Yes, though I think for such a class we probably want to consider all virtual
> methods unreachable unless they have explicit default visibility; in the
> testcase the main program isn't being compiled with -fvisibility=hidden, so
> ~Derived has implicit default visibility.
Yes, I think this makes sense. Do you think you can implement the C++ FE part
that will mark classes having methods with visibility specified?
We do not LTO stream TYPE_METHODS so this is bit hard to determine at
gimple-fold
time. At some point I tried to enable TYPE_METHODS streaming but it had bad
effect on firefox LTO linktimes by significantly increasing strongly connected
component size.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-23 21:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-07 13:03 [Bug c++/62051] New: [4.9/4.10] " raphael.kubo.da.costa at intel dot com
2014-11-19 13:27 ` [Bug c++/62051] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-19 9:31 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [4.9/5 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-19 10:38 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-19 19:15 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-23 15:50 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-23 19:30 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-23 23:20 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz [this message]
2015-06-26 20:05 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [4.9/5/6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-06-26 20:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-12 8:45 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-03-21 13:59 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [8/9/10 " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-27 11:37 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [8/9/10/11/12 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-28 7:04 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [9/10/11/12 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-10 7:20 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-10 14:39 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21 7:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-20 12:55 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [10/11/12/13 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-04-26 6:55 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [10/11/12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-07-27 9:20 ` [Bug ipa/62051] [11/12/13/14 " rguenth 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-62051-4-2GWBsyGhds@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).