From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7534 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2013 19:53:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 7524 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Feb 2013 19:53:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,MIME_QP_LONG_LINE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cesium.clock.org (HELO cesium.clock.org) (192.5.16.65) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:53:44 +0000 Received: from [10.34.26.54] (unknown [216.200.161.146]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: matt) by cesium.clock.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 626DD15EC17; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:53:43 -0800 (PST) References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7F108175-818B-4B1B-9BA3-BBF3EBBCC92C@use.net> Cc: GCC Patches From: Matt Hargett Subject: Re: Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:53:00 -0000 To: Xinliang David Li 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00737.txt.bz2 On Feb 14, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Matt wrote: >> The attached patches do two things: >> 1. Backports a fix from trunk that eliminates bogus warning traces. On my >> current codebase which links ~40MB of C++ with LTO, the bogus warning tr= aces >> are literally hundreds of lines. >=20 > What is the trunk revision? Richard's original patch was committed to trunk in r195884. >> I verified the backport fixed our issue by doing doing a profiledbootstr= ap >> using the bootstrap-lto.mk config with -O3 added. I used the resulting >> compiler on the proprietary codebase, C++Benchmark, scummvm, and a few o= ther >> open source projects to validate. >>=20 >> 2. Our primary development platform is RHEL6.1-based, and the recent >> autoconf requirement bump locked us out. I lowered the version, and saw = no >> difference in ability to configure/bootstrap. >>=20 >> Thanks! >>=20 >>=20 >> -- >> tangled strands of DNA explain the way that I behave. >> http://www.clock.org/~matt