http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52188
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor <jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-16 15:55:04 UTC --- First and foremost, sorry for the big delay but I could not have a look at this PR earlier. Nevertheless, I doubt that the decision of the new IPA-CP not to clone the function in question can be called a bug. Yes, if the heuristics or other early optimizations results change, the cloning decision might change again in the future - even in between minor versions if we are really unlucky.
