This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug lto/54966] Does LTO requires a larger inline-unit-growth?


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |lto
                 CC|                            |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-10-18 09:43:45 UTC ---
I'm not sure how we count the initial unit size, given that when not using
LTO not merged comdats are probably counted here, so overall they add up
while the initial LTO unit size may be considerably smaller than the sum
of the non-LTO unit sizes.

Honza?


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