https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19842
--- Comment #26 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> --- > What's your reasoning? If the prevailing definition is in the IR, the > compiler will (theoretically) supply a more-optimized version of that > function than the one in the non-LTO object. Why deliberately favor > the unoptimized version over the optimized version? The case where this came up is when we are merging the optimised object, and were given a weak symbol. The non-LTO object (from -ffat-lto-objects) isn't loaded if the plugin claims the object. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
