On 9 August 2017 at 17:52, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
>> > I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
>> > build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can rev
2017-08-09 11:22 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou :
> What are the reasons it is ignored? IIRC some compilers have buggy LTO
> support and it can lead to crashes during compilation.
Issues with LTO:
http://bugs.python.org/issue28032
http://bugs.python.org/issue28605
But since --with-lto is now an opt-in
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:16:36 +0200
Victor Stinner wrote:
> There is already a ./configure --with-lto flag, why not using it?
>
> I'm using --with-lto without PGO for months, I never noticed that the
> option is fully ignored!
What are the reasons it is ignored? IIRC some compilers have buggy LTO
There is already a ./configure --with-lto flag, why not using it?
I'm using --with-lto without PGO for months, I never noticed that the
option is fully ignored!
Victor
2017-08-09 9:52 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou :
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On 8 August 2017 at 10:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
> > I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
> > build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests
> > altering configure.ac and Makef
On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
> I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
> build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests
> altering configure.ac and Makefile.pre.in to make such a change.
Being able to separate them
; Victor Stinner
Cc: Python-Dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto
I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests altering
configure.ac
er Xihong
> Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 5:00 PM
> To: Victor Stinner ; Soldea, Octavian <
> octavian.sol...@intel.com>
> Cc: Python-Dev@python.org
> Subject: RE: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding
> lto
>
> We evaluated different tests before sett
Stinner ; Soldea, Octavian
Cc: Python-Dev@python.org
Subject: RE: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto
We evaluated different tests before setting down and proposing regrtest suite
for PGO training, including using OpenStack benchmarks for OpenStack
applications. The
Behalf Of
Victor Stinner
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2017 4:43 PM
To: Soldea, Octavian
Cc: Python-Dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto
I don't think that PGO compilation itself is slow. Basically, I expect that it
only doubles the compilation
@krypto.org]
> Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 3:12 PM
> To: Soldea, Octavian ; Python-Dev@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto
>
>
>
> I've personally never seen a situation where PGO is not desired yet some
> other fan
post introduction and question regarding lto
I've personally never seen a situation where PGO is not desired yet some other
fancier optimization such as LTO is. When do you encounter people wanting that?
PGO always produces a 10-20% faster CPython interpreter.
I have no problem with pa
I've personally never seen a situation where PGO is not desired yet some
other fancier optimization such as LTO is. When do you encounter people
wanting that? PGO always produces a 10-20% faster CPython interpreter.
I have no problem with patches enabling an LTO only build for anyone who
wants on
13 matches
Mail list logo
