On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:04 AM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > > Hi. > > The patch is about using Optimization for warn_inline as > it's affected by -O0. > > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > > Ready to be installed?
Err - Optimization also lists it in some -help section? It's a Warning option and certainly we don't handle per-function Warnings in general (with LTO) even though we have #pragma GCC diagnostic, no? I'm not sure why we force warn_inline to zero with -O0, it seems much better to guard false warnings in some other way for -O0? Richard. > Thanks, > Martin > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2019-12-11 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz> > > PR tree-optimization/92860 > * common.opt: Make in Optimization option > as it is affected by -O0, which is an Optimization > option. > * tree-inline.c (tree_inlinable_function_p): > Use opt_for_fn for warn_inline. > (expand_call_inline): Likewise. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > 2019-12-11 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz> > > PR tree-optimization/92860 > * gcc.dg/pr92860.c: New test. > --- > gcc/common.opt | 2 +- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr92860.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > gcc/tree-inline.c | 4 ++-- > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr92860.c > >
