From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 59753 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2015 23:09:23 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 59710 invoked by uid 55); 17 Apr 2015 23:09:19 -0000 From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/65797] [5 regression] IPA ICF causes function to be emitted with no debug line info Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 23:09:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at ucw dot cz X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: hubicka at ucw dot cz X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg01513.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65797 --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka --- Well, if you turn one function to alias of another, there is no way to preserve it (like Gold's ICF doesn't). With dwarf extensions we can restore some of the info based on context where the function is called, but not all of it. In this case I guess it would be an improvement to have wrapper function in the backtrace followed by the unexepected function we redirected to. Honza > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65797 > > --- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor --- > I think we should have a goal of making backtraces always work. I don't know > why we would ever want backtraces to fail. Every function should have a name > and a file name. I can accept that in some cases there may be no useful line > information, but it seems clear to me that a function should always have a > name. > > I would guess that thunks do not appear in backtraces because they end with a > jump instruction rather than a call. Note that my test case used > -fno-optimize-sibling-calls. > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are the assignee for the bug.