Hi,
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:28:49PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:00:52PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
...
> >> Here is what I mean:
> >>
> >> int func(int a, .)
> >> {
> >> if (a==some_const
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:00:52PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
>> Hi,
>> The current implementation of IPACP doesn't allowed to clone function
>> if caller(s) to that function is located in another object.
>
> That is not exactly
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:00:52PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
> Hi,
> The current implementation of IPACP doesn't allowed to clone function
> if caller(s) to that function is located in another object.
That is not exactly true. With -fipa-cp-clone (default at -O3),
IPA-CP is happy to c
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Dinar Temirbulatov
wrote:
> Hi,
> The current implementation of IPACP doesn't allowed to clone function
> if caller(s) to that function is located in another object. Of course,
> no such problems if we could utilized LTO. And it is very interesting
> to have such fu
