https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104539
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |missed-optimization
Last reconfirmed| |2022-02-15
Component|tree-optimization |c++
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to fail| |12.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
t.ii:9:20: missed: not inlinable: int g()/1 -> int f() [with int <anonymous>
= 0]/0, function body can be overwritten at link time
so the issue seems to be that explicitely instantiating changes
_Z1fILi0EEiv/1 (int f() [with int <anonymous> = 0]) @0x7ffff6697220
Type: function definition analyzed
Visibility: semantic_interposition public weak comdat
comdat_group:_Z1fILi0EEiv one_only
Aux: @0x42d7d00
References:
Referring:
Function flags: body
Called by: _Z1gv/0
Calls:
to
_Z1fILi0EEiv/0 (int f() [with int <anonymous> = 0]) @0x7ffff6697000
Type: function definition analyzed
Visibility: forced_by_abi semantic_interposition public weak
comdat_group:_Z1fILi0EEiv one_only
Aux: @0x7ffff6697220
References:
Referring:
Function flags: body
Called by: _Z1gv/1 (can throw external)
Calls:
the explicit instantiation lacks COMDAT (but has comdat_group) and it
has forced_by_abi.
I'm not sure the C++ standard calls out any semantic difference for
explicit vs. implicit instantiations but maybe the Itanium ABI does.
Jason? Honza?
