On 8/17/23 3:54 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I think it needs a new category, 'inline' is probably the "closest" existing one
but that also tends to be noisy. Maybe 'call' would be a good name? We could
report things like tail-recursion optimization, tail-calling and sibling calling
optimizations there, possibly also return/argument copy elision.
OK, thanks.
I have two questions:
1. Is the information dumped by -fopt-info intended for compiler
developers, to see something of the internal logic of gcc, or for end users?
2. You say that "'inline' ... tends to be noisy". Most of the output I
see from -fopt-info-missed is basically
_io.c:103829:4: missed: not inlinable: ___H___io/396 ->
__builtin_expect/2486, function body not available
Is ___builtin_expect truly a function whose body is not available, or
should -fopt-info-missed not report these instances?
Brad
