similar to: Default compression level for -compress-debug-info=zlib?

Also not an expert, but would it make sense for this to be configurable at a fine-grained level, perhaps with another option, or an extension to the compress-debug-sections switch interface? That way users who care about the finer details can configure it themselves. And we should pick sensible options for the default. James On 2 August 2018 at 11:08, Pavel Labath via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at

Hi Rui, What's the intended advantage for compressing the debug sections? - (i) Improved link time through smaller IO / (ii) Improved Load / startup time for the debugger / (iii) Smaller exe with debug info for distribution / disk space? For i) and ii) how much this is worth it depends on balance of storage bandwidth to compression (i) / decompression (ii) bandwidth. For spinning drives it

> As to (3), in most cases, I believe it is rare to distribute executables with debug info widely > I think it is at least less important than (1). Agreed. > I think (1) is definitely the case, and that's also true for a distributed build system with which a lot of object files are copied between machines. > My suggestion was to use compression level 9 when both -O2 and

Not really, as well as some sensitivity to the input data overall performance of the link with compression will depend on how this is implemented in lld - how is it parallelized? How is it chunked? Is it effectively pipelined with IO? Or, I wouldn't feel comfortable being able to make a recommendation to our end-users on whether to use this option or not based on my existing extensive

Hello, is it possible to compress by zlib only selected folders? My e-mail accounts have archive folder and this folder contains old comunications with my customers and this I use very rare, so I want to compress them by zlib to save space. Is this possible? Thanks, Filip Bartmann

On 2020-07-29, Eric Christopher wrote: >I think the arguments are largely compatibility for software that's already >deployed and can't easily upgrade, and wanting to ensure a larger time >frame for migration with a fallback if things go wrong. A bridge basically >from what we had to where we'd like to be. > >I think we also need to make the change in mainline lld as

Hello everyone, Is it possible to configure the zlib plugin to compress the emails in one folder only? I would like to compress the emails when they are stored in my 'Archives' folders and sub folders. Thanks, Andr? Rodier.

Created https://reviews.llvm.org/D84825 to be used for release/11.x I haven't seen a strong argument for changing other .debug_* but in any case I don't want to continue debating on this topic. * .debug_ranges & .debug_loc: -2 (lld<11: 0+addend) * .debug_*: 0 (lld<11: 0+addend, lld HEAD: -1) On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:47 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

As I mentioned in the thread (to many people who don't have time to read the discussions), pushing https://reviews.llvm.org/D84825 restores the original behavior. The same effect as one would get by reverting all related patches. If someone gives me an approval, I'll push it immediately. I already get verbal LGTM from Peter. > With respect I think the "request for changes"

Can we please just revert back to what we had before until the discussion about the desired behaviour and how to get there reaches a conclusion? In particular, I would like to merge that revert to the 11.x branch. At this point in the release process, I'm not keen on taking any patch that changes the behavior to something that hasn't been well tested from sitting in trunk for a while. On

Hi, I had an issue report from a user of my WriteXLS CRAN package indicating that Compress::Raw::Zlib is apparently not installed by default with Perl on Fedora 30. Since this appears to be a new issue, I am wondering if one of the Fedora maintainers on this list can confirm this and perhaps when the change may have occurred. If this is correct and not a Perl installation issue or other error,

Honestly even though I do understand the debug information I'm with you and one reason why I'm pushing for the same reset that you are. There are a lot of threads, it's fairly confusing what has been done where and other than some fairly widespread breakage among early users of lld (i.e. a short time from commit to use) it's unclear what the plan is to roll this out effectively

Dear All, I think I am confused about how I'd be able to use zlib starting with R 2.7.0. I just downloaded the latest development version, built it, etc, but I am not able to find the zlib.h that, I believe, R should place somewhere under "where/you/want/R/to/go" (from --prefix=/where/you/want/R/to/go). There seem to be entry points for zlib in the binary (e.g., grep -r gzopen ./

> I still think that we do bfd locs with a decent option to change for at least the current release and sources and then, once we're a little more certain we have everything that might want to parse dwarf (say by working with dwarf-discuss), we can change the default. Given what’s been found, I think Eric/Dave are correct, use bfd behavior by default with an option to do the new thing.

Hi, I'm wondering if someone already implemented a compression script (and would like to share it) based on the step-by-step provided on wiki page of Zlib module. I can already do some find|xargs gzip .... but couldnt implement it completly as described on the wiki page. I know the suggested step-by-step is very detailed and probably a must simplier will be enough for almost

In short: Perhaps we should switch lld to the bfd-style tombstoning behavior for a release or two, letting users opt-in to testing with the new -1/-2 tombstoning in the interim, before switching to the new tombstone by default (while still having the flag to switch back when users find surprise places that can't handle the new behavior). In long: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81784 and follow-on

I can confirm: [spot at localhost ~]$ rpm -q perl --requires |grep Zlib perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib perl-IO-Zlib [spot at localhost ~]$ rpm -q perl perl-5.28.2-436.fc30.x86_64 It would require either notable human intervention (or a canceled mid-upgrade state) for a Fedora 30 system to end up with perl, but not perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib. Thanks, Tom On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:42 AM Marc Schwartz

Hello OpenSSH developers, openssh 4.2p1 breaks old openssh clients up to 3.4p1 when they try to use compression: # ssh-3.4p1 -C remote-host-with-4.2p1 pwd no matching comp found: client zlib server none,zlib at openssh.com option "-vv" shows ... debug2: kex_parse_kexinit: zlib ... debug2: kex_parse_kexinit: none,zlib at openssh.com ... debug2: mac_init: found hmac-md5 no

Hi, In the file lld/ELF/Driver.cpp in function getCompressDebugSections we can see that the current default for lld is no debug section compression. It looks like tools like gdb, valgrind, elfutils, gcc's backtrace lib currently support compressed symbols. Since perf can use libdw from elfutils, I guess it supports it too. Do you think it's time to enable compressed debug section by

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:50 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:32 PM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Honestly even though I do understand the debug information I'm with you > and one reason why I'm pushing for the same reset that you are. There are a > lot of threads, it's fairly