From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23072 invoked by alias); 16 Dec 2010 14:29:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 23064 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Dec 2010 14:29:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ksp.mff.cuni.cz (HELO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.26.206) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:29:10 +0000 Received: by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 4018) id E1BEFF0A4D; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:29:07 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:09:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Richard Guenther Cc: Andi Kleen , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Andi Kleen , "Joseph S. Myers" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Fix -fno-lto (PR lto/46905) Message-ID: <20101216142907.GP5409@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <1292503308-11258-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <87pqt1hn1e.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg01311.txt.bz2 > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Richard Guenther writes: > > > >> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > >>> From: Andi Kleen > >>> > >>> This fixes PR lto/46905. > >>> > >>> It's sometimes convenient in large Makefiles to globally enable LTO > >>> in CFLAGS, but disable it again for specific files. The simplest > >>> way to do that is appending -fno-lto, but that didn't work. > >>> Add explicit code to handle this case. > >>> > >>> Passes bootstrap and full test on x86_64-linux. Ok? > >> > >> Do you really need the common.opt and opts.c hunks? > > > > Yes. The previous state without them didn't work. > > > > I also tried to do it without opts.c, but setting an 0 initialization > > value for the -fno-lto entry, but that didn't work either. > > Huh, that's strange. Joseph, do you have any idea why? Is it because > of how flags get passed to collect2? I think it is because -flto is not switch but accept string argument? Honza > > Richard. > > > -Andi > > > > -- > > ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. > >