https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104468
--- Comment #6 from Erik Carstensen ---
thanks! Looks like the second change repairs __attribute__((optimize("O0")));
this leads to a smaller reproducer: the problem is reproduced if I remove that
attribute and compile with "-g -O0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104468
--- Comment #3 from Erik Carstensen ---
Do we know that some suspected underlying issue is fixed, or could it be that
the window of slowness (struct size ∈ [17,80]) just has moved?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104468
--- Comment #2 from Erik Carstensen ---
Perhaps the problem is unrelated to function calls; it seems the time is
quadratic in the number of struct literals: If I change argument types to
pointers, then the issue remains if I pass the args as
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: erik.carstensen at intel dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 52392
--> https://gcc.gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85233
--- Comment #2 from Erik Carstensen ---
I know nothing about GCC internals, but I did make some observations on the
warning's behaviour while minimizing the test case. An unqualified guess based
on this is that intraprocedural analysis is not
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: erik.carstensen at intel dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 43858
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43858=edit
Reproducer
When compil
