Re: DWZ 0.14 released

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 11:38:07AM +0000, Hannes Domani via Dwz wrote:
>  Am Dienstag, 9. März 2021, 10:10:47 MEZ hat Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> Folgendes geschrieben:
> 
> > Hi Allan,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:06:54AM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > > Btw, question for gcc/binutils
> > >
> > > Any reason the work done by tools like dwz couldn't be done in the compiler or
> > > linker? Seems a bit odd to have a post-linker that optimizes the generated
> > > code, when optimizations should already be enabled.
> >
> >
> > dwz does two kinds of optimization. First it attempts to optimize the
> > DWARF debugging information for a given object (executable or shared
> > library). Secondly it tries to put shared pieces of a list of given
> > objects into a supplemental file that gets referenced from all the
> > given object files.
> >
> > Technically the first optimization could be done by the linker. But
> > the second optimization is really a post-linker step.
> 
> Related question: If it were part of binutils, maybe it could be adapted to
> optimize DWARF debugging information of PE files as well.

dwz intentionally uses libelf, it often deals with very large amounts of
debug info that only barely fit into the address space limitations on
certain arches or physical memory for good performance, and any kind of
abstraction penalty (e.g. bfd) would make it slower and more memory hungry.
So no, PE support is not possible.

	Jakub