On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Ilya Verbin <iver...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14 Nov 09:01, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Ilya Verbin <iver...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On 14 Nov 08:46, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> What happens when -flto is used on command line? Will we >> >> generate both LTO IR and offload IR? >> > >> > Right. >> > >> > I'm not sure whether we should make slim objects in case of LTO + offload >> > IR... >> > >> >> Isn't __gnu_lto_slim only applied to regular LTO IR? Should offload IR be >> handled separately from regular LTO IR? It is odd to use flag_fat_lto_objects >> to control offload IR. > > It is handled separately, but it uses a common infrastructure with regular LTO > for streaming, therefore compile_file automatically emits __gnu_lto_slim when > there is at least one section with IR (flag_generate_lto is set). You propose > to introduce a second flag like flag_fat_lto_objects to disable > __gnu_lto_slim?
Err... why is offloading not guarded with a new symbol like __gnu_lto_offload? Richard. > > -- Ilya
