From: Christian Bruel <christian.bruel@st.com>
To: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATH] PR/49139 fix always_inline failures diagnostics
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 08:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DEC9699.4010102@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimqr+1cQBFgkuSiCf1ugmsR7qBVGg@mail.gmail.com>
>> OK, the only difference is that we don't have the node analyzed here, so
>> externally_visible, etc are not set. With the initial proposal the warning
>> was emitted only if the function could not be inlined. Now it will be
>> emitted for each DECL_COMDAT (decl)&& !DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P (decl)) even
>> if not preemptible, so conservatively we don't want to duplicate the
>> availability check.
>
> Hm, I'm confused. Do all DECL_COMDAT functions have the
> always_inline attribute set? I would have expected
>
> + if (lookup_attribute ("always_inline", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl)))
> + {
> + if (!DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P (decl))
> + warning (OPT_Wattributes,
> + "always_inline not declared inline might not be inlinable");
> + }
>
I meant !DECL_COMDAT || !DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P. but I was
overprecautious. Didn't realize that member functions was already marked
with DECLARED_INLINED_P even if not explicitly set. So OK one check is
enough
> do you get excessive warnings with this?
>
No I don't. That's enough to catch the original issue
Cheers
Christian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-06 8:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-31 9:07 Christian Bruel
2011-05-31 12:25 ` Richard Guenther
2011-05-31 12:28 ` Jakub Jelinek
2011-05-31 17:07 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-01 10:03 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-01 13:02 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-01 13:07 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-06 8:58 ` Christian Bruel [this message]
2011-06-06 9:55 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-08 8:25 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-08 9:42 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-08 11:56 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-14 11:29 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-20 13:36 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-20 13:46 ` Rainer Orth
2011-06-20 13:54 ` Mike Stump
2011-06-20 14:04 ` Christian Bruel
2011-06-21 11:52 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-21 12:07 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-20 13:51 ` Richard Guenther
2011-06-01 14:49 ` Jan Hubicka
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=4DEC9699.4010102@st.com \
--to=christian.bruel@st.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hubicka@ucw.cz \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
/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).