This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [wwwdocs] IPA and LTO updates


* Andi Kleen wrote on Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 05:19:58PM CET:
> > Another issue that is at least debatable is whether you want to pass on
> > flags like n (--dry-run, probably yes), k (--keep-going, not so sure),
> > t (--touch, not sure either).  There are more.
> 
> Why not? I don't see any harm from doing the same in a submake
> as the main make.

Will the final link also be driven by the makefile or are there parts
which are not?  If the latter, then with --dry-run, you might not run
the parallel parts but do run the final serial parts; that either causes
a failure then (which is relatively harmless but a bit annoying), or
actually link the wrong (or insufficiently optimized) code, which can
be more annoying.

IOW, if you pass through those flags, the user might rightfully come to
expect the rest of the link to obey similar semantics.

Cheers,
Ralf


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