From: Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@gnu.org>,
Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [build, lto] Only accept -fuse-linker-plugin if linker supports -plugin (PR lto/46944)
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 10:45:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1105301152140.810@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yddk4d87eu1.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
On Mon, 30 May 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> writes:
>
> > Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> I think we should do the linker version checks which relate to linker-plugin
> >> use on the plugin-linker instead. So if I specify a separate but known
> >> buggy linker I don't want it to be used by default.
> >
> > Here's a patch that does this. I'm not at all happy with the patch
> > since it partially duplicates the logic to determine linker version
> > numbers. While this could (and probably should) be generalized along
> > the lines of gcc_GAS_CHECK_FEATURE and gcc_GAS_VERSION_GTE_IFELSE, even
> > that wouldn't help immediately since such autoconf macros would still
> > $gcc_cv_ld. As far as I can see, all those linker checks could
> > massively benefit from an overhaul to use gcc_LD_CHECK_FEATURE
> > etc.macros, but that's not something I want to attack. It's especially
> > messy that there are two sets of version variables for in-tree and
> > external linkers. Probably fodder for the build maintainers.
> >
> > Anyway, here's what I've got. Tested by configuring with
> >
> > * no --with-ld arg (i.e. /usr/ccs/bin/ld)
> >
> > * --with-ld=/path/to/gld-2.21 --with-gnu-ld
> >
> > * --with-plugin-ld=/path/to/gld-2.21
> >
> > * --with-ld=/path/to/gld-2.21 --with-gnu-ld --with-plugin-ld=/usr/ccs/bin/ld
> >
> > and checking HAVE_LTO_PLUGIN in auto-host.h (0, 2, 2, 0).
> >
> > I haven't found if there are provisions for in-tree gold, though, and
> > still cannot test that.
> [...]
> > Could the whole bunch eventually be backported to the 4.6 branch?
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00759.html
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg01890.html
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg01250.html
> >
> > and this one?
>
> This question remains: is this series appropriate for the 4.6 branch or
> should it stay on mainline only?
I think it should stay on mainline for now.
Richard.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-30 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-26 3:26 Michael Matz
2011-03-26 11:15 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-28 10:20 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-28 10:50 ` Richard Guenther
2011-04-04 16:16 ` Rainer Orth
2011-04-11 13:26 ` Rainer Orth
2011-04-18 18:34 ` Ralf Wildenhues
2011-04-19 17:53 ` Rainer Orth
2011-04-26 16:01 ` Rainer Orth
2011-04-26 22:27 ` Ralf Wildenhues
2011-04-27 14:36 ` Rainer Orth
2011-04-19 12:28 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-04-19 17:57 ` Rainer Orth
2011-05-30 10:27 ` Rainer Orth
2011-05-30 10:45 ` Richard Guenther [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-02-07 12:11 Rainer Orth
2011-02-14 19:44 ` Ralf Wildenhues
2011-03-10 11:26 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-10 11:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-03-10 12:26 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-10 16:51 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-10 17:06 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-10 18:28 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-11 12:30 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-11 14:37 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-11 15:10 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-11 15:18 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-11 15:32 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-11 15:35 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-14 19:07 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-15 9:42 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-16 9:23 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-16 9:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-03-16 9:43 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-18 9:27 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-18 10:09 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-18 10:16 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-18 10:19 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-18 10:23 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-18 10:34 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-21 10:18 ` Rainer Orth
2011-03-21 10:27 ` Richard Guenther
2011-03-21 10:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LNX.2.00.1105301152140.810@zhemvz.fhfr.qr \
--to=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de \
--cc=bonzini@gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=matz@suse.de \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).