This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: LTO multiple definition failures
- From: Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>
- To: Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 23:31:14 +0100
- Subject: Re: LTO multiple definition failures
- References: <4EFCDFCF.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <4F01DF33.email@example.com>
> Anyway, the problem here isn't that I particularly care about coming up
> with some workaround to make LTO work, but rather that tests from the
> gcc testsuite are failing on this target because of what looks like
> buggy LTO behavior instead of bugs in the target support, and I wanted
> to be sure this was being tracked somewhere. I didn't see a relevant
> issue in either the gcc or binutils bugzillas, but if it's a known
> consequence of the ld -r problem, I'll shut up and go away again. ;-)
AFAIK none of the test suite tests the ld -r problem, at least not on x86-linux.
So it may be something else and still worth tracking down.
firstname.lastname@example.org -- Speaking for myself only.