https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=126902
Bug ID: 126902
Summary: function::curr_properties vs
function::after_inlining/always_inline_functions_inlin
ed
Product: gcc
Version: 17.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: internal-improvement
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
after_inlining and always_inline_functions_inlined are very similar to
curr_properties/PROP_* (specifically PROP_last_full_fold) in that they are
properties of the current function set by the passes.
always_inline_functions_inlined was added in r0-90991-g0889e9bc6841c7 by Jakub
while PROP_last_full_fold was added in r15-6725-g2cbd4409bcfaba again by Jakub.
after_inlining was added in r0-68254-g98f464e05898aa which was before
curr_properties which was added in r0-77995-ga5093353f1d469 (which moved it
from being a static variable to be part of function struct).
The question becomes should after_inlining and always_inline_functions_inlined
be moved to be a PROP_* ? or should last_full_fold (and some other PROP_*)
become a bitfield?
