https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80223
--- Comment #21 from Fangrui Song <i at maskray dot me> --- (In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #20) > For example, if an inlining pass happens after instrumentation, then the > function attribute doesn't necessarily need to suppress inlining. After > instrumentation is done, we can even treat the noprofile attribute as a > no-op. Sent too early:) Amendment: a smart inliner can inline the noprofile callee and then drop instrumentation code. That will also be an approach which does not break the "no instrumenting my code" contract. Other approaches can be (probably more relevant to function specialization/clones): the instrumentation pass can leave an un-instrumented copy which can be used by a subsequent inliner. As we can see, all these approaches are much more complex than simply "suppressing inlining". So I agree that "suppressing inlining" is a good implementation detail here.
