mtrofin added a comment. In D94644#2497180 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D94644#2497180>, @aeubanks wrote:
> An alternative is to run the mandatory inliner in the same CGSCC pipeline as > everything else, but the way InlineAdvisorAnalysis is setup made it hard to > implement I don't remember there being a particular challenge with the advisor - it was more that there was the other value of having a more accurate 'view' of the overall shape of the functions, if we want to include more context in inlining decision making. My preference would be to have a robust solution that addresses both this and the previous problem. So I make sure I understand it correctly: it sounds like in PR48734, the callee wasn't first optimized through the function simplification pipeline, is that correct? Let's try the mandatory inliner in the same CGSCC - happy to do that. Is PR48734 an emergency (I can take a look at this tomorrow morning PST) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94644/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D94644 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
