https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> --- > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88297 > > --- Comment #5 from michael.ploujnikov at oracle dot com --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > So before the patch we were just lucky, right? When seeing the patches I > > wondered whether we instead want to add a clone_count member to cgraph_node > > (which we could stream) and use that for the .NUM suffix. We alread have > > it (sort-of) if we walk the clones list and do counting, right? > > But the root of the problem is that multiple different cgraph_nodes share the > same name, so even if two or more nodes like that have counters == 0 we would > get the same conflict. Unless it's always the case that the additional They are linked together as "transparent aliases". So one node has no transparent_alias set and other sets it and node->alias_target will get you to the "master" node. Honza
