> On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 06:10:08PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > My understanding of simd clones is bit limited, but I think you are > > right that they should have the same semantics as their caller. > > > > I think const may be one that makes compiler to ICE, but > > there are many other places where function body is analyzed and all its > > aliases/thunks and other variants should be updated too. For exmaple > > set_pure_flag, nothrow, noreturn and analysis done by modref, > > ipa-refernece etc. > > > > I wonder if we want to update them all and hide that in some > > abstraction? Next stage 1 I can work on inventing iterators for those > > kind of things as current approach combinindg direct walkters and > > function wrappers has become bit hard to maintain in cases like this. > > I think it depends on whether we do that analysis or update it post IPA > or not. Because simd clones are created very late during IPA, if say > the nothrow, noreturn, modref etc. analysis is done only during IPA or > before it, we don't need to walk the simd clones. > It is just for late GIMPLE analysis that changes flags that later on > could be used in callers of those functions. > pure/const flag is what I know can happen this late, what else?
We have late pure/const (doing pure, const, nothrow, noreturn), modref (which also discovers pure/const attributes and produces its own summaries) and except.c at the very end of copimlation can set notrow flag... This is all I can think of. Honza > > Jakub >
