androm3da wrote: > I'm going to defer to @aankit-ca though I suppose Ankit won't have enough > history/context to know why it was chosen the way it was? > > I would hope that either @SundeepKushwaha or @quic-seaswara will know why we > want small data on by default, because I don't. I suspect it gives better > code size performance on benchmarks and that's why? > > > it depends on linker support which LLD does not have > > I'll keep fixing hexagon lld bugs as we encounter them. But it's worth > mentioning that the vast majority of hexagon codegen put to use in real > devices gets linked with `ld.eld`. > > I will concede that I like the uniformity when the llvm project comes with > its own linker. Though, at the same time, there's some [risk of a monoculture > there too](https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-June/133308.html).
@aankit-ca can you weigh in on this PR? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/187344 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
