[PATCH] testsuite: mips: use noinline attribute instead of -fno-inline

[Jeff Law]

On 6/25/2021 8:40 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
>> On Fri, 2021-06-25 at 01:02 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2021-06-24 at 10:48 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>> I'd like to know a bit more here.  mips.exp shouldn't care about the
>>>> options passed to the compiler and to the best of my knowledge
>>>> patch itself is wrong, I question if it's necessary and whether or
>>>> not
>>>> your just papering over some other issue.
>>> There is some logic processing options in mips.exp.  Some options are
>>> overrided for multilib.  It seems the mips.exp was originally designed
>>> as:
>>>
>>> * MIPS options should go in dg-options
>>> * Other options should go in dg-additional-options
>>>
>>> In d2148424165 marxin merged some dg-additional-options into dg-
>>> options,
>>> exploited the problem.
>>>
>>> And, the "origin" convention seems already broken: there is something
>>> like -funroll-loops which is not a MIPS option, but accepted by
>>> mips.exp
>>> in dg-options.
>>>
>>> Possiblities are:
>>>
>>> (1) this patch
>>> (2) make mips.exp accept -fno-inline as "if it is a MIPS option"
>>> (3) refactor mips.exp to pass everything itself doesn't know directly
>>> to gcc
>> Attached a diff for mips.exp trying to make it pass everything in dg-
>> options which is not known by itself directly to the compiler.
>>
>> The "smallest fix" is simply adding -fno-inline into mips.exp.  However
>> I don't like it because I agree with you that mips.exp shouldn't care
>> about dg-options, at least don't do it too much.
> As I said in the other message, I think the smallest fix is the way to
> go though.
THanks for chiming in Richard.  I didn't know all the background here.   
Let's just go with the small fix based on your recommendation.  We can 
always revisit if we keep running into issues in this code.

jeff