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

From: Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
To: Bingfeng Mei <bmei at broadcom dot com>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:26:17 +0200
Subject: Re: LTO question
References: <7FB04A5C213E9943A72EE127DB74F0ADA6654A8933@SJEXCHCCR02.corp.ad.broadcom.com> <x2l84fc9c001004280233h7ed0d3aaj261fd276abe079b@mail.gmail.com> <7FB04A5C213E9943A72EE127DB74F0ADA6654A8A50@SJEXCHCCR02.corp.ad.broadcom.com> <20100428112054.GA22195@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <7FB04A5C213E9943A72EE127DB74F0ADA6654A8AB1@SJEXCHCCR02.corp.ad.broadcom.com> <20100428125856.GE9094@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <7FB04A5C213E9943A72EE127DB74F0ADA6654A8AE4@SJEXCHCCR02.corp.ad.broadcom.com>

>> > 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.

Cheers,

Manuel.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: LTO question
  - From: Diego Novillo

References:
- LTO question
  - From: Bingfeng Mei
- Re: LTO question
  - From: Richard Guenther
- RE: LTO question
  - From: Bingfeng Mei
- RE: LTO question
  - From: Bingfeng Mei

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