similar to: RFC [ThinLTO]: Promoting more aggressively in order to reduce incremental link time and allow sharing between linkage units

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose changes to how we do promotion of global values in > ThinLTO. The goal here is to make it possible to pre-compile parts of the > translation unit to native code at

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 3, 2016, at 10:01 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >>

> On Apr 6, 2016, at 9:40 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk <mailto:peter at pcc.me.uk>> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 6,

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose changes to how we do promotion of global values in > ThinLTO. The goal here is to make it possible to pre-compile parts of the > translation unit to native code at

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 9:40 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com <mailto:tejohnson at google.com>> wrote: >> >> >>

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com <mailto:davidxl at google.com>> wrote: >> >>

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 12:39 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com <mailto:davidxl at google.com>> wrote: >> >> >>

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Alex Rosenberg <alexr at leftfield.org> wrote: > My earlier statement about wrapping things in a native object file held in that it is controversial. It appears to be still central to your design. > > It may help to look at the problem from a different viewpoint: LLVM is not a compiler. It is a framework that can be used to make compiler-like tools.

My earlier statement about wrapping things in a native object file held in that it is controversial. It appears to be still central to your design. It may help to look at the problem from a different viewpoint: LLVM is not a compiler. It is a framework that can be used to make compiler-like tools. >From that view, it no longer makes sense to discuss "the plugin," or gold, or $AR,

As promised, here is an new version of the ThinLTO RFC, updated based on some of the comments, questions and feedback from the first RFC. Hopefully we have addressed many of these, and as noted below, will fork some of the detailed discussion on particular aspects into separate design doc threads. Please send any additional feedback and questions on the overall design. Thanks! Teresa Updated RFC

I've included below an RFC for implementing ThinLTO in LLVM, looking forward to feedback and questions. Thanks! Teresa RFC to discuss plans for implementing ThinLTO upstream. Background can be found in slides from EuroLLVM 2015: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B036uwnWM6RWWER1ZEl5SUNENjQ&authuser=0) As described in the talk, we have a prototype implementation, and would like to

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Alex Rosenberg <alexr at leftfield.org> > wrote: > > My earlier statement about wrapping things in a native object file held > in that it is controversial. It appears to be still central to your design. > > > > It may help to look at the

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:19 AM, Dave Bozier <seifsta at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Teresa, > > Thanks for providing this updated RFC. > >> For Sony's linker, are you using the gold plugin or libLTO interfaces? >> If the latter, I suppose some ThinLTO handling would have to be added >> to your linker (e.g. to invoke the LLVM hooks to write the stage-2 >>

Hi all, I wanted to make this proposal to extend ThinLTO to allow a bitcode module to embed another bitcode module containing summary information. The purpose of doing so is to support CFI and whole-program devirtualization optimizations under ThinLTO. Overview The CFI and whole-program devirtualization optimizations work by transforming vtables according to the class hierarchy. For example,

On Jun 1, 2015, at 6:34 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Alex Rosenberg <alexr at

Hi all, Below is a proposal for refining the way we communicate between the ThinLTO link step (the combined indexing step) and the backend processes that do the actual importing and other summary-based optimizations in a distributed backend process. Mehdi, let me know if this addresses your concerns. Peter, PTAL from the standpoint of any summary extensions needed for CFI and make sure they can

2018-02-08 9:33 GMT-08:00 Steven Wu <stevenwu at apple.com>: > > > On Feb 7, 2018, at 4:03 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2018-02-07 12:45 GMT-08:00 Steven Wu <stevenwu at apple.com>: > >> >> >> On Feb 7, 2018, at 12:36 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > But it is

2018-02-07 12:45 GMT-08:00 Steven Wu <stevenwu at apple.com>: > > > On Feb 7, 2018, at 12:36 PM, Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > > > But it is interesting in general because according to the definition > for local_unnamed_addr, the symbol has to be linkonce_odr to be auto hide > as well. ThinLTO promotion can break that as well. > > What do

> But it is interesting in general because according to the definition for local_unnamed_addr, the symbol has to be linkonce_odr to be auto hide as well. ThinLTO promotion can break that as well. What do you mean that the promotion can break that? The original description I found here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D20348 says that it is possible to exclude a global from the symbol table if three

On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Teresa, > > Thanks for layout down a detailed proposal on top of the slides, it is > very instructive and very pleasant to read. > Hi Mehdi, Thanks! > > I have a few questions, none of which touches the ELF aspect! :) > I apologize if you already addressed them and I missed it (if