Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Injected-Via-Gmane:	http://gmane.org/
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From:	"Alex Vinokur" <alexvn AT connect DOT to>
Subject:	Re: Is a function actually inlined?
Date:	Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:47:03 +0200
Lines:	52
Message-ID:	<bm1f2v$glo$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:	<bm0ks2$j8i$2 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 56 DOT 0310081236250 DOT 15176 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
X-Complaints-To:	usenet AT sea DOT gmane DOT org
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Newsreader:	Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106

"Igor Pechtchanski" <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu> wrote in message news:Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 56 DOT 0310081236250 DOT 15176 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu...
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Alex Vinokur wrote:
>
> > "Corinna Vinschen" wrote in message news:20031008100004 DOT GC2070 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de...
> > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:19:27AM +0200, Alex Vinokur wrote:
> > > > How can one know if a function requested to be inlined is actually
> > > > inlined?
> > >
> > > A look into the assembler output generated by gcc/g++ will show you.
> >
> > How can one conclude if a function is actually inlined on the basis
> > working with the nm and objdump utilities? For instance, are 'the foo2()
> > and foo3() function from my original posting' actually inlined?
>
> The general rule of thumb is: if there's a call to a function, it's not
> inlined.
>
> > $ grep foo t.s
> >
> > .globl __ZN3Foo4foo1Ev
> >  .def __ZN3Foo4foo1Ev; .scl 2; .type 32; .endef
> > __ZN3Foo4foo1Ev:
> >  call __ZN3Foo4foo1Ev
> >  call __ZN3Foo4foo2Ev
> >  call __ZN3Foo4foo3Ev
>    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> FWIW, it doesn't look like they are inlined.

On the other hand we don't see
* call foo2()
  and
* call foo3()
here :

$ objdump -CS t.o | grep foo

  1a: e8 00 00 00 00        call   1f <main+0x19>
  1f: e8 00 00 00 00        call   24 <main+0x1e>
  2a: e8 d1 ff ff ff        call   0 <Foo::foo1()>
  35: e8 00 00 00 00        call   3a <main+0x34>
  40: e8 00 00 00 00        call   45 <main+0x3f>

   =====================================
   Alex Vinokur
     mailto:alexvn AT connect DOT to
     http://mathforum.org/library/view/10978.html
   =====================================






--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -