<matthew.fort...@imgtec.com> wrote:
> Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Matthew Fortune
> > <matthew.fort...@imgtec.com> wrote:
> > > I'd therefore like to apply the following. Any suggestions on the
> > > testing that this needs? Would a build + regression run of GCC with
> > > binutils configured --disable-plugins be sufficient?
> >
> > Sure, that sounds reasonable. Note that I think the patch is ok
> > anyway - passing a "redundant" -ffat-lto-objects won't break anything.
> >
> > Thus, ok.
>
> OK, I wasn't sure if there were any scenarios where an explicit -ffat-
> lto-objects would make a difference. I keep getting lost when trawling
> through the LTO option handling logic.
>
> I'll run a quick test anyway and commit.
It seems I never committed this. Now committed! r241306
Matthew
>
> Thanks,
> Matthew
>
> >
> > > Matthew
> > >
> > > gcc/testsuite/
> > >
> > > * lib/gcc-dg.exp: Set gcc_force_conventional_output for
> whenever
> > > LTO is used.
> > >
> > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> > > b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp index 6df8ae1..8d5bf9b 100644
> > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> > > @@ -88,13 +88,13 @@ if [check_effective_target_lto] {
> > > { -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none }
> \
> > > { -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects }
> > > ]
> > > - set gcc_force_conventional_output "-ffat-lto-objects"
> > > } else {
> > > set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \
> > > { -O2 -flto -flto-partition=none } \
> > > { -O2 -flto }
> > > ]
> > > }
> > > + set gcc_force_conventional_output "-ffat-lto-objects"
> > > }
> > >
> > > global orig_environment_saved
