public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc mailing list <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Link-time optimzation
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:28:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <437BDC9E.3080608@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051117011900.GA17847@redhat.com>

Richard Henderson wrote:

In general, I'm going to just collect comments in a folder for a while,
and then try to reply once the dust has settled a bit.  I'm interested
in seeing where things go, and my primary interest is in getting *some*
consensus, independent of a particular one.

But, I'll try to answer this:

> In Requirement 4, you say that the function F from input files a.o and
> b.o should still be named F in the output file.  Why is this requirement
> more than simply having the debug information reflect that both names
> were originally F?  I see you go to some length in section 3 to ensure
> actual symbol table duplicates, and I don't know why.

Our understanding was that the debugger actually uses the symbol table,
in addition to the debugging information, in some cases.  (This must be
true when not running with -g, but I thought it was true in other cases
as well.)  It might be true for other tools, too.

It's true that, from a correctness or code-generation point of view, it
shouldn't matter, so, for non-GNU assemblers, we could fall back to
F.0/F.1, etc.

> The rest of the requirements look good.  I cannot immediately think of
> anything you've forgotten.

Thanks!

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304

  reply	other threads:[~2005-11-17  1:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-16 22:26 Mark Mitchell
2005-11-16 22:41 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-16 22:58 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17  0:02 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17  0:25 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17  0:52   ` Tom Tromey
2005-11-17  0:26 ` Giovanni Bajo
2005-11-17  0:32   ` Daniel Berlin
2005-11-17  9:04     ` Giovanni Bajo
2005-11-17 16:25       ` Kenneth Zadeck
2005-11-17  1:20 ` Richard Henderson
2005-11-17  1:28   ` Mark Mitchell [this message]
2005-11-17  1:31     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-17  3:35     ` Jeffrey A Law
2005-11-17 14:09       ` Daniel Berlin
2005-11-17 14:48         ` mathieu lacage
2005-11-17 11:41     ` Richard Earnshaw
2005-11-17 21:40       ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-17 23:10         ` Robert Dewar
2005-11-17 23:42           ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-18  2:13             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-18  9:29               ` Bernd Schmidt
2005-11-18 11:19                 ` Robert Dewar
2005-11-18 11:29                 ` Richard Earnshaw
2005-11-18 11:40                   ` Directly generating binary code [Was Re: Link-time optimzation] Andrew Haley
2005-11-18 12:04                     ` Laurent GUERBY
2005-11-18 17:41                       ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-18 18:35               ` Link-time optimzation Mike Stump
2005-11-18  2:33           ` Dale Johannesen
2005-11-18  3:11             ` Geert Bosch
2005-11-18 18:43             ` Mike Stump
2005-11-18 18:30           ` Mike Stump
2005-11-17 15:54   ` Kenneth Zadeck
2005-11-17 16:41     ` Jan Hubicka
2005-11-18 16:31     ` Michael Matz
2005-11-18 17:04       ` Steven Bosscher
2005-11-18 17:29         ` Michael Matz
2005-11-18 17:24     ` Nathan Sidwell
2005-11-17  1:43 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2005-11-17  1:53 ` Andrew Pinski
2005-11-17  2:39 ` Kean Johnston
2005-11-17  5:53 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-17 13:08   ` Ulrich Weigand
2005-11-17 21:42     ` Ian Lance Taylor
2005-11-17 16:17   ` Kenneth Zadeck
2005-11-17  0:52 Chris Lattner

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=437BDC9E.3080608@codesourcery.com \
    --to=mark@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=rth@redhat.com \
    /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).