On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:20:29AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:39:34AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > always_inline attribute is meaningful only for functions declared
> > inline, and the compiler even warns about this, so it is unclear
> > to me why the tests are attempting to use that.
>
> Since Gcc emits just a cryptic warning and not an error, many
> people seem to have missed that always_inline's behaviour is
> undefined for functions without "inline". There are many more
> test cases that forget the "inline" and filter the warning with
> "-Wno-attributes". I'll post an add-on patch later after testing
> it.
Well, we need some testcases that actually verify we don't ICE
when the inline keyword is not missed.
But if you mean tests like e.g. i386/mpx/, or some other s390/
tests, then indeed, those should be fixed.
Jakub
