Re: [PATCH] Fix ix86_function_regparm with optimize attribute (PR target/60062, take 3)

2014-02-06 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 08:42:27PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: So, where do we want to do that instead? E.g. should it be e.g. in tree_versionable_function_p directly and let the inliner (if it doesn't do already) also treat optimize(0) functions

Re: [PATCH] Fix ix86_function_regparm with optimize attribute (PR target/60062, take 3)

2014-02-06 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote: On Thu, 6 Feb 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 08:42:27PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: So, where do we want to do that instead? E.g. should it be e.g. in tree_versionable_function_p directly and let

[PATCH] Fix ix86_function_regparm with optimize attribute (PR target/60062, take 3)

2014-02-05 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 08:42:27PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: So, where do we want to do that instead? E.g. should it be e.g. in tree_versionable_function_p directly and let the inliner (if it doesn't do already) also treat optimize(0) functions that aren't always_inline as noinline? So,