https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24729
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-30 13:35 ---
I should probably also note that IPA branch will get it right in the testcase
(and the other PR) via early inlining, but it sadly won't get it right in any
consistent manner...
Honza
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-30 13:33 ---
This is probably won't fix as well. The problem is that calls to builtins in
general can be produced arbitrarily late in the compilation process (before RTL
expansion).
We might try to do limited inliner pass specia
--- Comment #5 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-24 17:03 ---
Here's a version of the testcase that doesn't rely on _unlocked functions since
25022 inhibits the unlocked transformations. Compile at -O2 with and without
-DPUTCHAR_DIRECT to see the effect. Using putchar directly
--- Comment #4 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 01:00 ---
Builtin fputs{_unlocked} et al. are transformed via fold_builtin as well as
expand. AFAICT folding is done rather early, so perhaps this can be fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24729
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24729
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-08 10:16 ---
Note that it is too late for the inliner to come in at builtin expansion time.
It may be possible to "fix" this with the SSA inliner on IPA branch, but I'm
not sure if it is worth it. Maybe Honza can give some inpu
--- Comment #2 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-08 04:28 ---
I'm not convinced it's the same issue. With regard to 17402, comment #6 by
Joseph there refers specifically to static inlines in that builtins shouldn't
generate calls to "file-scope statics". However in my case glib
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-08 03:52 ---
I want to say this is dup of bug 17402 which was marked as will not fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24729
