https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115129
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Ah, because that realloc definition makes realloc CONST, but the replacement
builtin is not.
Honza, I know we still have that loop pattern detection bug detecting
memcpy as memcpy. What's our (IPA?) strategy in these kind of situations?
Should we avoid messing with builtin implementation attributes?
We can of course sanity-check at folding time and leave realloc w/o virtual
operands alone, but ...
