On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Sriraman Tallam <tmsri...@google.com> wrote: > Patch attached to fix this: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57698 > > Here is what is going on. In rev. 200179, this change to tree-inline.c > > Index: tree-inline.c > =================================================================== > --- tree-inline.c (revision 200178) > +++ tree-inline.c (revision 200179) > @@ -3905,8 +3905,6 @@ > for inlining, but we can't do that because frontends overwrite > the body. */ > && !cg_edge->callee->local.redefined_extern_inline > - /* Avoid warnings during early inline pass. */ > - && cgraph_global_info_ready > /* PR 20090218-1_0.c. Body can be provided by another module. */ > && (reason != CIF_BODY_NOT_AVAILABLE || !flag_generate_lto)) > { > > made inline failure errors during early inlining reportable. Now, > this function is called when the early_inliner calls > optimize_inline_calls. The reason for the failure, > CIF_INDIRECT_UNKNOWN_CALL, should not be reported because it is not a > valid reason,(see can_inline_edge_p in ipa-inline.c for the list of > reasons we intend to report) but it gets reported because of the above > change. > > > The reported bug happens only when optimization is turned on as the > early inliner pass invokes incremental inlining which calls > optimize_inline_calls and triggers the above failure. > > So, the fix is then as simple as: > > Index: tree-inline.c > =================================================================== > --- tree-inline.c (revision 200912) > +++ tree-inline.c (working copy) > @@ -3905,6 +3905,10 @@ expand_call_inline (basic_block bb, gimple stmt, c > for inlining, but we can't do that because frontends overwrite > the body. */ > && !cg_edge->callee->local.redefined_extern_inline > + /* During early inline pass, report only when optimization is > + not turned on. */ > + && (cgraph_global_info_ready > + || !optimize) > /* PR 20090218-1_0.c. Body can be provided by another module. */ > && (reason != CIF_BODY_NOT_AVAILABLE || !flag_generate_lto)) > { > > Seems like the right fix to me. Ok? The whole patch with test case > included is attached. >
This caused: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59789 -- H.J.
