similar to: RFC: LTO should use -disable-llvm-verifier

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:40 AM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On 2015-Aug-31, at 10:42, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Rafael Espíndola < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > > Not sure I follow? Generally LTO inputs are going to

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On 2015-Aug-31, at 11:41, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:40 AM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > > On

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Rafael Espíndola <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > Not sure I follow? Generally LTO inputs are going to be "user provided" > (in the sense that they're not produced immediately prior by the same > process - or you'd have just produced a single Module in the first place, I > would imagine) so changing the default

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Rafael Espíndola <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Having it off by default makes sense to me. We just need an easy way of > enabling it from the clang driver. > Not sure I follow? Generally LTO inputs are going to be "user provided" (in the sense that they're not produced immediately prior by the same process - or you'd have

> On 2015-Aug-31, at 18:09, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 5:50 PM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > On 2015-Aug-31, at 12:21, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > Yep. This is where I was going :) > > Glad I found consensus, but I want to

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> On 2015-Sep-02, at 19:31, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 01:10:42AM +0000, Eric Christopher wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:43 AM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < >>> dexonsmith at

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 01:10:42AM +0000, Eric Christopher wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:43 AM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < > dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 2015-Aug-31, at 18:09, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 5:50 PM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith

> On 2015-Aug-31, at 12:21, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > Yep. This is where I was going :) Glad I found consensus, but I want to double-check that this makes sense to add to the driver. I didn't quite think through the implications myself. Since the driver doesn't know if there's any bitcode, or if LTO is going to be invoked, it seems like I'll

> On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:45 AM, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2015-Sep-02, at 19:31, Peter

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:45 PM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Sep 2, 2015, at 7:31 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 01:10:42AM +0000, Eric Christopher wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:43 AM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < > >>

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:48 AM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > On Sep 4, 2015, at 12:22 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:45 PM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > On Sep 2, 2015, at 7:31 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev < >>

On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 11:13:43AM -0700, Mehdi Amini wrote: > > > On Sep 4, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:48 AM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Sep 4, 2015, at 12:22 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo

On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 03:11:39PM -0700, Mehdi Amini wrote: > > > On Sep 4, 2015, at 11:38 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 11:13:43AM -0700, Mehdi Amini wrote: > >> > >>> On Sep 4, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> >

Thanks for all the feedback and questions, answers below. Teresa On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > >> On 2015-May-13, at 11:44, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: >> >> I've included below an RFC for implementing ThinLTO in LLVM, looking >> forward to feedback and questions. >>

+nick and rafael, who seem to a lot about linkage. I made the following claim on llmv-commits [1]: On 2014 Mar 3, at 15:01, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > Giving these functions internal linkage allows them to be dead-stripped. Is that even correct? This is the assumption I’ve been working under, but I’m not sure where I got it from. It seems like the

> On 2016-May-27, at 10:47, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On May 27, 2016, at 9:57 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 2016-May-27, at 05:55, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>>

Thanks to you both. On my Linux (centos6) system, I have reproduce a variant of the bug and learned about -plugin-opt=-debug-pass=Arguments which I infer from comments is intended to built arguments to “opt” however I found that some of the arguments don’t seem to be quite correct. I assume this just minor bit rot. bin/opt -o pass1.bc -datalayout -notti -basictti -x86tti -targetlibinfo

Hello LLVM, When building LLVM/Clang (debug build), linking takes too long. I notice that LTO is enabled now and guess that's to blame. Is there a CMAKE config option to disable LTO linking? I can't seem to find anything. Thanks, -steve

2017-05-02 8:42 GMT-07:00 Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com>: > +Teresa, Mehdi > > On May 2, 2017, at 08:31, James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk> > wrote: > > Hi, > > We have been investigating an issue when running LTO with our proprietary > linker, which links against libLTO dynamically. The issue is that when we > pass

Hello, I down loaded "llvm-gcc4.2-2.7-x86_64-linux" and I built Spec2006 with it. It is great and except for one benchmark the rest work fine. I want to build them with LTO now. I followed the directions in " http://llvm.org/docs/GoldPlugin.html" and built ar, nm-new, and ld-new in binutils. I also built libLLVMgold.so. I get the following error: llvm-gcc: -use-gold-plugin,