https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102814
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #1) > Question to the larger audience... do we support bug reports against > internal --param constructs? Yes. Generally 'max-jump-thread-duplication-stmts' would suggest this is a parameter limiting code size growth and one that might affect compile-time in a linear fashion - exponential growth here is unexpected. The reporter states a 180 -> 181 parameter change trips this over unexpectedly which is a case worth investigating (it suggests a limit elsewhere is missing). For example the alias walking code counts the amount of "work" it does and has a limit on that, allowing linear growth parametrization. Not sure if there's sth in the threader and/or ranger that would support accumulating a work budget and stop after it is exhausted, but something like that would be very useful (not sure if that's the problem at hand in this case).
