> > Um not sure if I understood correctly. > > Do we want to constrain individual partition size by adding parameter > > lto-max-partition > > for balanced partitioning but not for -flto-partition=one > > case (since latter would also change semantics of =one) ? > > Yes, I think so.
Yep, I agree. Having partition one that produces multiple partitions doesn't seem to make much sense. Given that we have such not so predictable target specific limits on size of single translation unit we can handle, I suppose adding a resonable limit to the default balanced partitioning makes more sense. One can always push the behaviour you intend by setting max partitions to 1 (I suppose max size should have precedence over max partitions) Honza > > Richard. > > > Thanks, > > Prathamesh > > > > > > Richard. > > > > > > -- > > > Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> > > > SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, > > > HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) > > > > > > -- > Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> > SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB > 21284 (AG Nuernberg)
