Re: [PATCH] doc: document incremental LTO flags

Michal Jires writes: > On Thu, 2025-03-27 at 15:33:44 +, Sam James wrote: >> >> One thing I wasn't quite sure on yet: is -flto-partition=cache automatic >> with -flto-incremental? Or is it just an optional flag I can pass for >> more effective incremental LTO? >> >> If it's the latter, shou

Re: [PATCH] doc: document incremental LTO flags

On Thu, 2025-03-27 at 15:33:44 +, Sam James wrote: > > One thing I wasn't quite sure on yet: is -flto-partition=cache automatic > with -flto-incremental? Or is it just an optional flag I can pass for > more effective incremental LTO? > > If it's the latter, should we mention that in the -flto

Re: [PATCH] doc: document incremental LTO flags

Michal Jires writes: > This adds missing documentation for LTO flags. > > Ok? > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * doc/invoke.texi: (Optimize Options): > Add incremental LTO flags. > --- > gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 26 +++--- > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >

Re: [PATCH] doc: document incremental LTO flags

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025, Michal Jires wrote: > This adds missing documentation for LTO flags. > > Ok? OK. Thanks, Richard. > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * doc/invoke.texi: (Optimize Options): > Add incremental LTO flags. > --- > gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 26 +++--- > 1 file ch