>
> I did not really like it either (although I must say that in general I
> really dislike the need to call expand_thunk but telling it to not
Yeah, I am thinking about simply teaching inliner to handle them. Given the
issues
with extra copies for values passed by reference it may be better so
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 10:43:19PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 08:18:12PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > when debugging PR 63814 I noticed that when cgraph_node::create_clone
> > > was using redirect_edge_duplicating_thunks to redirect two edges to
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 08:18:12PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > when debugging PR 63814 I noticed that when cgraph_node::create_clone
> > was using redirect_edge_duplicating_thunks to redirect two edges to a
> > thunk of a clone, two thunks were created, one for each edge. The
>
Ping.
Thx,
Martin
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 08:18:12PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when debugging PR 63814 I noticed that when cgraph_node::create_clone
> was using redirect_edge_duplicating_thunks to redirect two edges to a
> thunk of a clone, two thunks were created, one for each edg
Hi,
when debugging PR 63814 I noticed that when cgraph_node::create_clone
was using redirect_edge_duplicating_thunks to redirect two edges to a
thunk of a clone, two thunks were created, one for each edge. The
reason is that even though duplicate_thunk_for_node attempts to locate
an already creat
