Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 26 May 2020 09:01:13 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for May 21 (objtool warnings)
Message-ID: <20200526140113.ppjywpx7uir3vrlj@treble>
References: <20200522001209.07c19400@canb.auug.org.au>
 <22332d9b-5e9f-5474-adac-9b3e39861aee@infradead.org>
 <alpine.LSU.2.21.2005251101030.24984@pobox.suse.cz>
 <alpine.LSU.2.21.2005251303430.24984@pobox.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2005251303430.24984@pobox.suse.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 01:07:27PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > I'll try to find out which optimization does this, because it is a 
> > slightly different scenario than hiding __noreturn from the callees. 
> > Probably -fno-ipa-pure-const again.
> 
> And it is indeed -fno-ipa-pure-const again.

It still seems odd to me that GCC's dead end detection seems to break
with -fno-ipa-pure-const.  Do you know if these issues can be fixed on
the GCC side?

-- 
Josh