On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:04:00PM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 03:21:40PM +, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Would it be possible to split this into:
> >
> > (1) (basic) arm64 clang support
> > (2) gold support (no LTO)
> > (3) LTO support
> >
> > ... with any necessary work
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 03:21:40PM +, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Would it be possible to split this into:
>
> (1) (basic) arm64 clang support
> (2) gold support (no LTO)
> (3) LTO support
>
> ... with any necessary workarounds added as-required to the relevant
> series?
Absolutely. I'll split the
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 01:34:10PM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> This series adds build system support for compiling the kernel with clang
> Link Time Optimization (LTO), using GNU gold with the LLVMgold plug-in
> for linking.
As a high-level comment, this path series is rather confusing fo
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:53:00PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> I would suggest you to add the patch that checks their versions and
> disables LTO if needed.
Sure, sounds reasonable. I'll add this in the next version.
Sami
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 01:34:10PM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> This series adds build system support for compiling the kernel with clang
> Link Time Optimization (LTO), using GNU gold with the LLVMgold plug-in
> for linking. Some background for clang's LTO support is available here:
>
> https:
This series adds build system support for compiling the kernel with clang
Link Time Optimization (LTO), using GNU gold with the LLVMgold plug-in
for linking. Some background for clang's LTO support is available here:
https://llvm.org/docs/LinkTimeOptimization.html
With -flto, clang produces LLV
6 matches
Mail list logo
