Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-09-01 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > > > > Yep, this looks like a resonable direction. It will break the one > > > > > declaration > > > > > rule in a more wild sense than current frontends does so, because if > > > > > a builtin > > > > > wi

Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-09-01 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > > Yep, this looks like a resonable direction. It will break the one > > > > declaration > > > > rule in a more wild sense than current frontends does so, because if a > > > > builtin > > > > win as a prevailing declaration, we end up with no mergi

Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-09-01 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > Yep, this looks like a resonable direction. It will break the one > > > declaration > > > rule in a more wild sense than current frontends does so, because if a > > > builtin > > > win as a prevailing declaration, we end up with no merging at all. > >

Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-09-01 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > Yep, this looks like a resonable direction. It will break the one > > declaration > > rule in a more wild sense than current frontends does so, because if a > > builtin > > win as a prevailing declaration, we end up with no merging at all. > > I wonder if we don't want to always prevail to fi

Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-08-31 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > @@ -811,5 +806,9 @@ lto_symtab_prevailing_decl (tree decl) > >if (!ret) > > return decl; > > > > + /* Do not replace a non-builtin with a builtin. */ > > + if (is_builtin_fn (ret->decl)) > > +return decl; > > + > > Yep, this looks like

Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-08-31 Thread Jan Hubicka
> @@ -811,5 +806,9 @@ lto_symtab_prevailing_decl (tree decl) >if (!ret) > return decl; > > + /* Do not replace a non-builtin with a builtin. */ > + if (is_builtin_fn (ret->decl)) > +return decl; > + Yep, this looks like a resonable direction. It will break the one declaration rul

Re: getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-08-31 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > > Hi, > > with LTO early debug and LTO bootstrap I now get > > /usr/include/sys/resource.h:51:12: error: type of ‘getrlimit’ does not > match original declaration [-Werror=lto-type-mismatch] > extern int getrlimit (__rlimit_resource_t __resource, >

getrlimit compatibility issues

2015-08-31 Thread Richard Biener
Hi, with LTO early debug and LTO bootstrap I now get /usr/include/sys/resource.h:51:12: error: type of ‘getrlimit’ does not match original declaration [-Werror=lto-type-mismatch] extern int getrlimit (__rlimit_resource_t __resource, ^ /usr/include/sys/resource.h:51:12: note: type m