Re: LTO objects after build: Rebuilding vs erroring out

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Or if we recorded all command line options we care about into LTO bytecode
> (Optimization/Target options are recorded already on a per-function basis
> but I'm worried about others), just have a gcc driver mode that turns
> a non-fat LTO object into normal non-LTO object.

That sounds to me like the most reasonable thing to do. LTO bytecode is 
designed to be compiled to object code (at link time) after all, so why 
should it not be possible to convert (compile) it to an object code object 
file directly, without having to recompile the source file completely (with 
-fno-lto, the hack currently done for Clang)?

        Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux