http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60026
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > Created attachment 32030 [details] > gcc49-pr60026.patch > > The problem is that for -O0 we don't create vdef/vuse at all, but I'd say we > shouldn't be cloning -O0 functions either, even when they don't have noclone > argument. Thus perhaps something like attached patch? While the idea of the patch is of course good, it seems that we only set cannot_be_copied.* in copy_forbidden in tree-inline.c, so perhaps it would be better to put the optimized test there as well so that we never have any ordering issues?
