This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: LTO question


On 4/28/10 10:26 , Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>>> Not yet, I mistakenly thought -fwhole-program is the same as -fwhopr
>>>> and it is just for solving scaling issue of large program.(These two
>>>> options do look similar :-). I shall try next.
>>>
>>> Yep, -fwhopr is not ideal name, but I guess there is not much
>>> to do about it.
> 
> It is marked as experimental, so if it is going to stay for GCC 4.6,
> then we should change the name. I think one possibility discussed
> somewhere is that LTO scales back automatically, so the option would
> be not necessary.

Yes.  I think we should just keep -flto and make it use split
compilation if needed.  -fwhopr is only needed to explicitly enable it.
 My suggestion is to just keep -flto and invoke whopr with -flto=split
or -flto=big (until the automatic threshold is added).


Diego.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]