> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Guenther [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com] > Sent: 11 June 2010 14:08 > To: Bingfeng Mei > Cc: Dave Korn; Manuel López-Ibáñez; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Jan Hubicka > Subject: Re: Issue with LTO/-fwhole-program > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Bingfeng Mei <b...@broadcom.com> wrote: > > Well, mixed LTO/non-LTO is quite useful. For example, we have mixed > C/assembly > > Application. Gold support for our target is still far away. I found - > fwhole-program > > is very important for our size optimization. > > True. Without symbol resolution information when using GNU ld > it is hard to do anything reasonable though. How far has the > idea of adding resolution output to GNU ld developed?
Not much progress yet. I am not very familiar to structure of GNU LD, and need more time crack it. I applied Dave's patch and output l...@offset list from ld and hacked collect2. It can work if I annotate externally_visible attribute manually, but it seems quite error-prone process. So I also try to make sure resolution file is used for automatic annotation of externally_visible attribute. I will send an updated patch later. > > Richard. > > > Bingfeng > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Dave Korn [mailto:dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: 11 June 2010 14:21 > >> To: Richard Guenther > >> Cc: Manuel López-Ibáñez; Bingfeng Mei; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Jan Hubicka > >> Subject: Re: Issue with LTO/-fwhole-program > >> > >> On 11/06/2010 13:59, Richard Guenther wrote: > >> > >> > Well, we can't. We specifically support mixed LTO/non LTO objects > >> > (think of shared libraries for example). With the linker-plugin > and > >> gold > >> > we can do better, but with just GNU ld and collect2 we can't. > >> > >> Well then shouldn't we warn if -fwhole-program is used with mixed > LTO > >> and > >> non-LTO objects? Or disable it, or both? > >> > >> cheers, > >> DaveK > > > > > >
