Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "ltoo".
Did you mean:
lto
2015 Mar 19
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Controlling the LTO optimization level
...number 2 is probably the best.
> Some questions:
>
> * Should "clang -O3 foo.o -o foo" use LTO with -O3?
> * Should "clang foo.o -o foo" use LTO with -O0? That would be a fairly
> big change. Maybe we could make the LTO default be 3?
> * Should we just add a --ltoO to the clang driver that is independent of
> -O?
> * Some linkers already take a -O(1,2,3) option. Should we try to
> forward that or should we differentiate LTO optimizations and general
> linker optimizations?
>
>
The linker taking -O1,2,3 as a start is fine for sure. I'd ra...
2015 Mar 19
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Controlling the LTO optimization level
+ OptLevel = opt[1] - '0';
Please check and reject things like -OX at least in the gold plugin.
Can you add a test showing that
* createLowerBitSetsPass is run at -O0
* the addLateLTOOptimizationPasses passes are run at -O1, but not -O0
I think the patch is fine otherwise, but wait for a review from
someone on the ld64 side (Duncan, Manman or Bob for example).
Thanks,
Rafael
On 19 March 2015 at 15:55, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19,...
2015 Mar 18
5
[LLVMdev] Controlling the LTO optimization level
Hi all,
I wanted to start a thread to discuss ways to control the optimization
level when using LTO. We have found that there are use cases for the LTO
mechanism beyond whole-program optimization, in which full optimization
is not always needed or desired. We started that discussion over in
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20150316/266560.html
and I thought I'd
2017 Jul 31
3
[RFC] Profile guided section layout
Hi Rafael,
On 07/31/2017 04:20 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev wrote:
> However, do we need to start with instrumentation? The original paper
> uses sampling with good results and current intel cpus can record every
> branch in a program.
>
> I would propose starting with just an lld patch that reads the call
> graph from a file. The format would be very similar to
2017 Jun 15
7
[RFC] Profile guided section layout
...oCFGProfileReorder;
bool NoGnuUnique;
bool NoUndefinedVersion;
bool Nostdlib;
diff --git a/ELF/Driver.cpp b/ELF/Driver.cpp
index 1534c7e..06dd045 100644
--- a/ELF/Driver.cpp
+++ b/ELF/Driver.cpp
@@ -649,6 +649,7 @@ void LinkerDriver::readConfigs(opt::InputArgList &Args) {
Config->LTOO = getInteger(Args, OPT_lto_O, 2);
Config->LTOPartitions = getInteger(Args, OPT_lto_partitions, 1);
Config->MapFile = getString(Args, OPT_Map);
+ Config->NoCFGProfileReorder = Args.hasArg(OPT_no_cfg_profile_reorder);
Config->NoGnuUnique = Args.hasArg(OPT_no_gnu_unique);
Conf...
2017 Jul 31
2
[RFC] Profile guided section layout
...rofileReorder;
bool NoGnuUnique;
bool NoUndefinedVersion;
bool NoinhibitExec;
diff --git a/ELF/Driver.cpp b/ELF/Driver.cpp
index 263ba7b..84d4d80 100644
--- a/ELF/Driver.cpp
+++ b/ELF/Driver.cpp
@@ -644,6 +644,7 @@ void LinkerDriver::readConfigs(opt::InputArgList &Args) {
Config->LTOO = getInteger(Args, OPT_lto_O, 2);
Config->LTOPartitions = getInteger(Args, OPT_lto_partitions, 1);
Config->MapFile = Args.getLastArgValue(OPT_Map);
+ Config->NoCFGProfileReorder = Args.hasArg(OPT_no_cfg_profile_reorder);
Config->NoGnuUnique = Args.hasArg(OPT_no_gnu_unique);...