Does gcc have different inlining heuristics on different platforms?

[Eric Botcazou]

> You can see what -fuse-linker-plugin says, what gcc/auto-host.h contains
> for HAVE_LTO_PLUGIN.  I don't know whether the BFD linker (or mold)
> supports linker plugins on windows.  I do know that libiberty simple-object
> does not support PE, that is, at _least_ (DWARF) debuginfo will be subpar.

Here's an excerpt of a LTO compilation with -Wl,--verbose=2 on native Windows:

C:/GNATPRO/25.1/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/13.3.1/../../../../x86_64-
w64-mingw32/bin/ld.exe: C:\tmp\ccCnskmU.o (symbol from plugin): symbol `fma' 
definition: DEF, visibility: DEFAULT, resolution: PREVAILING_DEF_IRONLY
C:/GNATPRO/25.1/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/13.3.1/../../../../x86_64-
w64-mingw32/bin/ld.exe: C:\tmp\ccCnskmU.o (symbol from plugin): symbol `main' 
definition: DEF, visibility: DEFAULT, resolution: PREVAILING_DEF
C:/GNATPRO/25.1/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/13.3.1/../../../../x86_64-
w64-mingw32/bin/ld.exe: C:\tmp\ccCnskmU.o (symbol from plugin): symbol 
`__fpclassify' definition: UNDEF, visibility: DEFAULT, resolution: 
RESOLVED_EXEC
attempt to open C:\tmp\ccbENa6D.ltrans0.ltrans.o succeeded
C:\tmp\ccbENa6D.ltrans0.ltrans.o

This is with GNU ld.

-- 
Eric Botcazou