[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d073e2d75d9ed492de9a8dc6970e5b69fae20e5a commit r14-3226-gd073e2d75d9ed492de9a8dc6970e5b69fae20e5a Author: Martin Jambor Date: T

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor --- I have proposed a fix on the mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-May/619969.html

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka --- The information is consumed by ipcp_transform_function, so you can take a look. It is stored in ipcp_get_transformation_summary I think it is just matter of not freeing it (assuming it is freed after cloning is

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On December 16, 2015 7:28:35 PM GMT+01:00, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 > >--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka --- >For the Martin's answer. I pok

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka --- For the Martin's answer. I poked about this a bit. One can add call to node->get_body to the end of cgraph_materialize_clone which after removing the associated assert will call to the ipa-prop transform metho

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka --- > But how would you represent this info? I don't see how it's going to > do better than the inliner inserting an extra initialization (of course > that might stay around if there are no cleanup opportunities a

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 --- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 > > Jan Hubicka changed: > >What|Removed |Added >

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|

[Bug ipa/68930] Aggregate replacements not applied to inline function bodies.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68930 Jan Hubicka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenther at suse dot de --- Comment #1 fr