http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44992
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2012-05-07
11:50:07 UTC ---
*** Bug 43576 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44992
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44992
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44992
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.0 |4.6.1
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek
--- Comment #8 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-08-31 09:32 ---
Sorry this is not fixed yet, only partially. Still working on the last bits,
in particular passthrough of non LTOed code like assembler functions.
--
andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|R
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-31 09:13 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #6 from ak at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-23 05:34 ---
Subject: Bug 44992
Author: ak
Date: Fri Jul 23 05:33:51 2010
New Revision: 162443
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162443
Log:
gcc:
2010-07-10 Andi Kleen
PR lto/44992
* lto-opts
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-20 09:00 ---
I was refering to a situation like
gcc -c -flto t1.c
gcc -c t2.c
gcc -o t.o -r -nostdlib t1.o t2.o [-flto]
gcc -o t t.o -flto
which would break with your solution (it's broken right now as well, of
course).
We
--- Comment #4 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-07-19 19:46 ---
This is actually what I tried first, but it turned out to be quite complicated,
had to change a lot of code and my patch was growing and growing and it didn't
fit clearly with the different readers etc.
That is why
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-19 19:35 ---
I must say I don't like your solution. IMHO much better is instead add a
header to LTO sections, which says the length of the LTO chunk (similarly e.g.
to how .debug_info section chunks have length in the header), per
--- Comment #2 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-07-19 16:31 ---
Not sure I understand the comment.
The case I've been looking at is ld -r (without a LTO code generation stage)
to combine existing object and then using gold for the final linking/LTO code
generation based on the
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-19 16:20 ---
And partial linking support will break mixed LTO / non-LTO objects. Unless
we drop all non-LTO sections from LTO objects and thus the .text sections
of partially linked mixed LTO / non-LTO objects will be still used
12 matches
Mail list logo
