[Bug ipa/91988] Inlining fails with LTO enabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91988 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Duplicate. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 70929 ***
[Bug ipa/91988] Inlining fails with LTO enabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91988
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
The failure is triggered by compile-time(!)
Breakpoint 6, symbol_table::create_edge (this=0x76810100,
caller=,
callee=, call_stmt=0x77fefea0,
count=..., indir_unknown_callee=false)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/gcc-9-branch/gcc/cgraph.c:884
884 edge->inline_failed = CIF_MISMATCHED_ARGUMENTS;
and also
Breakpoint 7, early_inliner (fun=0x7696b210)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/gcc-9-branch/gcc/ipa-inline.c:2841
2841 edge->inline_failed = CIF_MISMATCHED_ARGUMENTS;
we ultimatively call
types_compatible_p (type1=,
type2=)
from
static bool
gimple_check_call_args (gimple *stmt, tree fndecl, bool args_count_match)
{
...
if (TREE_VALUE (p) == error_mark_node
|| arg == error_mark_node
|| TREE_CODE (TREE_VALUE (p)) == VOID_TYPE
|| (!types_compatible_p (TREE_VALUE (p), TREE_TYPE (arg))
&& !fold_convertible_p (TREE_VALUE (p), arg)))
return false;
we're looking at TYPE_ARG_TYPES here because we don't have a PARM_DECL
and as we know TYPE_ARG_TYPES do _not_ reflect by-reference semantics.
But we could take TREE_ADDRESSABLE as a hint.
Index: gcc/cgraph.c
===
--- gcc/cgraph.c(revision 276396)
+++ gcc/cgraph.c(working copy)
@@ -3728,7 +3728,10 @@ gimple_check_call_args (gimple *stmt, tr
|| arg == error_mark_node
|| TREE_CODE (TREE_VALUE (p)) == VOID_TYPE
|| (!types_compatible_p (TREE_VALUE (p), TREE_TYPE (arg))
- && !fold_convertible_p (TREE_VALUE (p), arg)))
+ && !fold_convertible_p (TREE_VALUE (p), arg)
+ /* TREE_ADDRESSABLE types are passed by reference. */
+ && !(POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arg))
+ && TREE_ADDRESSABLE (TREE_VALUE (p)
return false;
}
}
fixes that (comparing the pointed-do type is probably too strict here).
[Bug ipa/91988] Inlining fails with LTO enabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91988 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > I see IPA-CP being applied and that function not inlined. > > Deciding on inlining of small functions. Starting with size 9. > Enqueueing calls in fun.constprop/9. > Enqueueing calls in main/3. > missed: not inlinable: main/3 -> fun.constprop/9, mismatched arguments > Unit growth for small function inlining: 9->9 (0%) > > looks like the inliner predicate needs to consider IPA-CP transform > being applied somehow? hmm, w/o LTO and early inlining disabled a single-TU testcase is fine: Deciding on inlining of small functions. Starting with size 12. Enqueueing calls in fun.constprop/6. Enqueueing calls in int main()/4. Estimating body: fun.constprop/6 Known to be false: not inlined size:0 time:0.00 nonspec time:2.00 Estimating body: fun.constprop/6 Known to be false: not inlined size:0 time:0.00 nonspec time:2.00 enqueuing call int main()/4 -> fun.constprop/6, badness -inf Enqueueing calls in int fun(A)/3. Estimating body: fun.constprop/6 Known to be false: not inlined size:0 time:0.00 nonspec time:2.00 ... t3.C:6:13: optimized: Inlined fun.constprop/6 into int main()/4 which now has time 2.00 and size 3, net change of -6.
[Bug ipa/91988] Inlining fails with LTO enabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91988 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-10-04 CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org, ||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Component|lto |ipa Ever confirmed|0 |1 Known to fail||9.2.0 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- I see IPA-CP being applied and that function not inlined. Deciding on inlining of small functions. Starting with size 9. Enqueueing calls in fun.constprop/9. Enqueueing calls in main/3. missed: not inlinable: main/3 -> fun.constprop/9, mismatched arguments Unit growth for small function inlining: 9->9 (0%) looks like the inliner predicate needs to consider IPA-CP transform being applied somehow?
