https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109213
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So the gist is that IMHO inlining shouldn't regress when 40 <- 264 is
changed to 0 <- 264 since the overall stack size is smaller and the absolute
growth is the same. That's just counter-intuitive.
This behavior isn't a recent regression, but the testcase regressed in 13
because of the extra variable elimination. For this reason making P2,
a regression when that stack limit related behavior was introduced.
Honza?
