https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78322
--- Comment #5 from David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4) > (In reply to David Blaikie from comment #2) > > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > > > We produce an abstract copy for use by repeated inline copies. > > > > Yep! Is it still reasonable to consider it a bug (or at least a feature > > request) that this is still produced even when no inline copies are emitted? > > Not really. > > Sounds like what you are aiming for is the nodebug attribute that you can > use with always_inline. Basically in dwarf inline functions are still > represented as functions (calls) and most folks want that for their > debugability of their program but in this case you specific inlined > functions not to have debug info which is exactly what nodebug would do ... Not sure I follow. I'm not suggesting this function should be `nodebug`. Specifically: If an abstract origin is unreferenced, it seems like it should/could be omitted, for brevity. If the abstract origin is referenced - if there was some remnant of the inlined code that then caused an inlined_subroutine to be emitted, that would need to reference the abstract origin and so the latter should be emitted. This is what clang does, at least - thought it might be nice for gcc to do that to, to have more compact DWARF output. https://godbolt.org/z/3doWWK4G4 (though, interestingly, since this bug was filed - in GCC 9, GCC started putting NOPs in for the inlined code, which is a nice touch - so at -O0 you can still step into/out of a no-op (or presumably otherwise optimized away? if you had some optimizations forced on at -O0 somehow) inlined function - but with optimizations enabled you still see the behavior of an abstract origin emitted without any uses/references to it)
