On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 3:18 PM Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villem...@prevas.dk> wrote: > > On 01/12/2021 14.17, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 12:08 PM Rasmus Villemoes <r...@rasmusvillemoes.dk> > > wrote: > >> > >> The transposition nolto -> notlo is confusing and it makes the long > >> name even harder to read than it already is - I kept reading it as > >> "not lo" until I realized it was a simply typo. > >> > >> Fixes: 5269b24605b1 (Silence warning in LTO mode on VxWorks) > > > > Hmm, if we ever released GCC with that lto-plugin behavior you should > > preserve > > accepting -linker-output-auto-notlo-rel in lto-plugin because a newer > > lto-plugin > > is required to work with older released GCC which continue to provide > > the option with the spelling mistake. > > I thought a given version of gcc would only use the plugin it shipped > with(?).
No. It's even older lto-plugins being used by newer compiler versions (just with a possibly reduced feature set) - typing that on a system with a lto-plugin from GCC 7 ;) > And even if in theory one should keep the plugin compatible with older > gcc releases, in this case it is only relevant to vxworks ports, so if > Eric and Olivier are ok with this as-is, perhaps we can avoid having to > accept both spellings forever. I think the cost is negligible - looks like only GCC 11 knows the flag so I would suggest to backport the patch to the GCC 11 branch as well (but there as well keep the compatibility). Richard. > > Rasmus
