On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:04:59 +0100
> Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented for a
>> while. -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to
>> not notice that LTO
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 19:04:59 +0100
Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented for a
> while. -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to
> not notice that LTO was not used at all (because they forgot to use
> gcc-ar/gcc
> On 11/19/2013 02:54 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> >The problem is that you have .a library consisting of slim LTO objects and
> >you link
> >with it during configure check without -flto.
>
> On the other hand, many configure checks will never work reliably
> with -flto because they rely heavily o
On 11/19/2013 02:54 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
The problem is that you have .a library consisting of slim LTO objects and you
link
with it during configure check without -flto.
On the other hand, many configure checks will never work reliably with
-flto because they rely heavily on the fact that
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > this is version I commited - we need to intrdocue var for
> > -fuse-linker-plugin
> > to be able to check it.
> >
> > I apologize for the breakage.
> > Honza
> >
> > * opts.c (finish_options): Imply -ffat-lto-objects with
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this is version I commited - we need to intrdocue var for -fuse-linker-plugin
> to be able to check it.
>
> I apologize for the breakage.
> Honza
>
> * opts.c (finish_options): Imply -ffat-lto-objects with
> -fno-use-linker-plugi
Hi,
this is version I commited - we need to intrdocue var for -fuse-linker-plugin
to be able to check it.
I apologize for the breakage.
Honza
* opts.c (finish_options): Imply -ffat-lto-objects with
-fno-use-linker-plugin.
* common.opt (fuse-linker-plugin): Add var.
Index: opts.c
Hi,
actually the flag is being passed to the frontends instead of being consumed by
the driver that makes life easier. I am testing the attached patch and will
commit it as obvious if it passes (to unbreak the testing).
Index: opts.c
===
> Jan Hubicka writes:
>
> > * config/bootstrap-lto.mk: Use -ffat-lto-objects.
> > * common.opt (ffat-lto-objects): Disable by default.
> > * doc/invoke.texi (fat-lto-objects): Update documentation.
> > * opts.c: Enable fat-lto-objects on lto plugin disable setups.
>
> This is bre
Jan Hubicka writes:
> * config/bootstrap-lto.mk: Use -ffat-lto-objects.
> * common.opt (ffat-lto-objects): Disable by default.
> * doc/invoke.texi (fat-lto-objects): Update documentation.
> * opts.c: Enable fat-lto-objects on lto plugin disable setups.
This is breaking al
> > On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> > > > Hmm, gcc/gcc.c still reads:
> > > >
> > > > 690 /* Conditional to test whether the LTO plugin is used or not.
> > > > 691FIXME: For slim LTO we will need to enable plugin
> > > > unconditionally. This
> > > > 692still cause prob
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > > Hmm, gcc/gcc.c still reads:
> > >
> > > 690 /* Conditional to test whether the LTO plugin is used or not.
> > > 691FIXME: For slim LTO we will need to enable plugin
> > > unconditionally. This
> > > 692still cause problems with PLUGIN
On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hmm, gcc/gcc.c still reads:
> >
> > 690 /* Conditional to test whether the LTO plugin is used or not.
> > 691FIXME: For slim LTO we will need to enable plugin unconditionally.
> > This
> > 692still cause problems with PLUGIN_LD != LD and wh
> Hmm, gcc/gcc.c still reads:
>
> 690 /* Conditional to test whether the LTO plugin is used or not.
> 691FIXME: For slim LTO we will need to enable plugin unconditionally.
> This
> 692still cause problems with PLUGIN_LD != LD and when plugin is built but
> 693not useable. For GC
On 2013.11.19 at 11:21 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > On 2013.11.19 at 09:44 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > Il 18/11/2013 20:09, Jan Hubicka ha scritto:
> > > >>> > > this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was
> > > >>> > > documented for a while.
> > > >>> > > -ffat-lto-objects
Il 19/11/2013 12:19, Markus Trippelsdorf ha scritto:
>> >
>>> > > So, maybe it is just time to upgrade libtool everywhere in gnu-land?
>> >
>> > Yes, that would be better but no need to do that now.
> So would Patches 1 and 2 be OK in the interim?
Yes. And Jan's answer suggests that patch 3 is
On 2013.11.19 at 11:54 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 19/11/2013 11:05, Markus Trippelsdorf ha scritto:
> > On 2013.11.19 at 09:44 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 18/11/2013 20:09, Jan Hubicka ha scritto:
> >>> this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented
> >
Il 19/11/2013 11:05, Markus Trippelsdorf ha scritto:
> On 2013.11.19 at 09:44 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 18/11/2013 20:09, Jan Hubicka ha scritto:
>>> this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented
>>> for a while.
>>> -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation
> On 2013.11.19 at 09:44 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 18/11/2013 20:09, Jan Hubicka ha scritto:
> > >>> > > this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was
> > >>> > > documented for a while.
> > >>> > > -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to
> > >>>
On 2013.11.19 at 09:44 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 18/11/2013 20:09, Jan Hubicka ha scritto:
> >>> > > this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented
> >>> > > for a while.
> >>> > > -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to
> >>> > > not noti
Il 18/11/2013 20:09, Jan Hubicka ha scritto:
>>> > > this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented
>>> > > for a while.
>>> > > -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to not
>>> > > notice that
>>> > > LTO was not used at all (because they forgot
> >ltobootstrapped/regtested ppc64-linux, OK?
>
> Ok with...
Thanks!
>
> Fullstop removed. Can you update changes.html with lto changes?
I sent first update this afternoon. Will remember to add the fat-lto-objects,
too.
Honza
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
> >! }
> >if ((opts->x_flag_lto_partit
> On 2013.11.18 at 19:04 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented for a
> > while.
> > -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to not
> > notice that
> > LTO was not used at all (because they forgot to use
Jan Hubicka wrote:
>Hi,
>this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented
>for a while.
>-ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to not
>notice that
>LTO was not used at all (because they forgot to use gcc-ar/gcc-nm
>plugins).
>
>Sadly I had to add -ff
On 2013.11.18 at 19:04 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented for a
> while.
> -ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to not
> notice that
> LTO was not used at all (because they forgot to use gcc-ar/gcc-nm
Hi,
this patch switches the default for fat-lto-objects as was documented for a
while.
-ffat-lto-objects doubles compilation time and often makes users to not notice
that
LTO was not used at all (because they forgot to use gcc-ar/gcc-nm plugins).
Sadly I had to add -ffat-lto-objects to bootstrap
26 matches
Mail list logo
