https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101279
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- > Am 28.06.2022 um 14:53 schrieb david at westcontrol dot com > <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org>: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101279 > > --- Comment #5 from David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com> --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) >> (In reply to frankhb1989 from comment #3) >>> There is a more specific instance here: can_inline_edge_by_limits_p in >>> ipa-inline.cc treats flags and "optimize" attributes differently. >> >> A bit up there's a blacklist we maintain where inlining is not OK because it >> results in semantic differences. >> >> Generally we it's hard to second-guess the users intention when looking >> at an inline edge with different optimization settings of caller and callee. >> For C++ comdats there might be even multiple variants with different >> optimization level (but we only keep one, special-casing this a bit). > > I appreciate the "err on the side of caution" attitude. Perhaps there could > be > an extra "I know what I'm doing" attribute that lets you override the > blacklisting in a particular case. This would only really make sense in cases > where the attribute can be attached to the expressions and statements within > the function (I think "-fwrapv" would be in this category). In cases where > this is not possible, an error or warning message would be in order as the > compiler can't do what the programmer is asking. Can you provide a specific example that you would allow this way? > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are on the CC list for the bug.
