On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 03:46:04PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 04:29, Andrew Scull <asc...@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 at 21:27, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > LTO (Link-Time Optimisation) is an very useful feature which can > > > significantly reduce the size of U-Boot binaries. So far it has been > > > made available for selected ARM boards and sandbox. > > > > > > However, incremental builds are much slower when LTO is used. For example, > > > an incremental build of sandbox takes 2.1 seconds on my machine, but 6.7 > > > seconds with LTO enabled. > > > > This is something that has been bothering me too. I'd resorted to adding > > `# CONFIG_LTO is not set` to sandbox_defconfig because I couldn't work > > out how to stop .config being regenerated each build. But then the > > diff gets in the way and is difficult to manage. > > > > > Add a LTO_BUILD=n parameter to the build, so it can be disabled during > > > development if needed, for faster builds. > > > > If you go the build parameter route rather than config route to > > address this, could the flag be consistent e.g. with NO_SDL=1, which > > would mean NO_LTO=1? > > That seems OK to me. Would you like to do that and send a new version? > > Here is a better version of the patch to use as a starting point: > > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-dm/-/commit/2d4ebfb0e8e86a1b347e6cbd4dbec9a4eb745bd5 > > Tom, please consider dropping your objection to this. I have already > shown that it makes a dramatic difference to incremental build time > for any board...
Yeah, OK, reworked to be consistent with now we do SDL is workable. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature