> On 21 Jun 2019, at 11:40, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > > On 6/21/19 12:34 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote: >> >>> On 21 Jun 2019, at 11:28, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 11:22, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 6/20/19 9:53 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >>>>> On June 20, 2019 5:09:55 PM GMT+02:00, "Martin Liška" <mli...@suse.cz> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 6/20/19 4:21 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 10:05 AM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In order to not buffer stderr output in LTO mode, I would like to >>>>>> remove >>>>>>>> support for repo files (tlink). If I'm correctly it's only used by >>>>>> AIX >>>>>>>> target. Would it be possible to drop that for the future? Is it even >>>>>>>> used? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> AIX currently does not support GCC LTO, but the hope was that GCC >>>>>>> would not do anything to specifically inhibit that ability to >>>>>>> eventually support that feature. AIX currently needs collect2. I >>>>>>> guess that AIX could try to find another mechanism when it adds >>>>>>> support. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, I'm fine with collect2. I'm more precisely asking about >>>>>> read_report_files >>>>>> that lives in tlink.c. If I understand correctly, it's parsing output >>>>>> of linker >>>>>> and tries to find template implementations in a .rpo files that live on >>>>>> a disk. >>>>>> That's a legacy functionality that I'm targeting to remove. >>>>> >>>>> IIRC -frepo also works on Linux? >>>> >>>> Heh, you are right ;). Is there are consumer of that infrastructure >>>> or can we just drop it? >>> >>> Anybody using option 2 at >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Template-Instantiation.html >>> >>> I have no idea if anybody is using that, but we should at least >>> deprecate it instead of just dropping a documented option without >>> warning. >> >> I should have been clearer about Darwin: >> >> collect2 is required because it wraps the calling of lto-wrapper and ld. >> >> FWIW Darwin also passes all the “-frepo” testcases, however, I’m not aware >> of anyone actually >> using case #2 from Jonathan’s post. >> >> So, AFAIK the tlink capability isn’t required for modern C++ on Darwin; but, >> maybe deprecation is a >> safer step. > > Thank you for the information. > > Yes, I would be fine to deprecate that for GCC 10.1
“thinking aloud” - would it work to deprecate (or even disallow immediately if no-one is using it) LTO + frepo? (so that non-LTO frepo continues as long as anyone needs it) Iain
