On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 11:43 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 7/4/19 5:03 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 10:38 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Recently I've introduced a new .gnu.lto_.lto section that
> >> is supposed to provide meta information about a LTO bytec
On 7/4/19 5:03 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 10:38 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> Recently I've introduced a new .gnu.lto_.lto section that
>> is supposed to provide meta information about a LTO bytecode.
>>
>> As a further step, I'm planning to teach binutils about
>>
On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 10:38 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> Recently I've introduced a new .gnu.lto_.lto section that
> is supposed to provide meta information about a LTO bytecode.
>
> As a further step, I'm planning to teach binutils about
> existence of the section and I'll remove in the fu
Hi.
Recently I've introduced a new .gnu.lto_.lto section that
is supposed to provide meta information about a LTO bytecode.
As a further step, I'm planning to teach binutils about
existence of the section and I'll remove in the future
emission of __gnu_lto_slim and __gnu_lto_v1 symbols.
The forme
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> On 10/31/2017 12:11 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>
>> With your recent removal of SDB and -gcoff support, I would appreciate
>> your advice about my patch to incrementally add some preliminary LTO
>> support for AIX to collect2.c:
>>
>> https://gc
On 10/31/2017 12:11 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
With your recent removal of SDB and -gcoff support, I would appreciate
your advice about my patch to incrementally add some preliminary LTO
support for AIX to collect2.c:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg00893.html
There don't seem to b
On 10/31/2017 12:11 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
With your recent removal of SDB and -gcoff support, I would appreciate
your advice about my patch to incrementally add some preliminary LTO
support for AIX to collect2.c:
OK. I can take a look. I started a new job this week, so I'm a bit
disorgan
On 10/30/2017 12:13 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/13/2017 12:04 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
This patch adds the basic LTO scanning pass to the COFF support in
collect2. I don't believe that this change should affect other COFF
targets adversely (do they even use collect2?), but I wanted to give
peopl
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/13/2017 12:04 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> The attached patch is an incremental step toward GCC LTO on AIX. The
>> recent Libiberty Simple Object improvements for XCOFF provide more
>> capabilities for operations on XCOFF object files, whic
On 10/13/2017 12:04 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> The attached patch is an incremental step toward GCC LTO on AIX. The
> recent Libiberty Simple Object improvements for XCOFF provide more
> capabilities for operations on XCOFF object files, which are a
> prerequisite for GCC LTO functionality.
>
>
The attached patch is an incremental step toward GCC LTO on AIX. The
recent Libiberty Simple Object improvements for XCOFF provide more
capabilities for operations on XCOFF object files, which are a
prerequisite for GCC LTO functionality.
This patch adds the basic LTO scanning pass to the COFF su
11 matches
Mail list logo