On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> We treated this g as a sibling call to f:
>
> int f (int);
> int g (void) { return f (1); }
>
> but not this one:
>
> struct s { int i; };
> struct s f (int);
> struct s g (void) { return f (1); }
>
> We treated them both as si
We treated this g as a sibling call to f:
int f (int);
int g (void) { return f (1); }
but not this one:
struct s { int i; };
struct s f (int);
struct s g (void) { return f (1); }
We treated them both as sibcalls on x86 before the first patch for PR36326,
so I suppose this is a regress
