This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFC][PATCH][ld][testsuite] Add -ffat-lto-objects option to some ld tests
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo dot tkachov at arm dot com>
- Cc: "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 06:58:26 -0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH][ld][testsuite] Add -ffat-lto-objects option to some ld tests
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5294B0F2 dot 8000006 at arm dot com> <CAMe9rOoi6PS6SWOJBsJHw=hFFTBeWohbsb_U+iBzTbRF=ft5Fw at mail dot gmail dot com> <5294B67E dot 8080600 at arm dot com>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> wrote:
> On 26/11/13 14:36, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm seeing some ld testsuite failures on arm-none-linux-gnueabi and
>>> aarch64-none-linux-gnu after a recent gcc commit (r205065) that set
>>> -fno-fat-lto-objects as the default:
>>>
>>> PASS->FAIL: LTO 3 symbol
>>> PASS->FAIL: PR ld/12758
>>> PASS->FAIL: PR ld/12760
>>> PASS->FAIL: PR ld/13183
>>>
>>> It seems that these tests need -ffat-lto-objects, at least on arm and
>>> aarch64, but I'm not sure I understand the structure of these ld tests
>>> well.
>>>
>>> Could someone please comment on whether this is the correct approach?
>>> CC'ing H.J. since he wrote the lto.exp file.
>>>
>> Does -ffat-lto-objects always work when -flto is supported?
>> If yes, OK for trunk.
>
>
> The gcc manual says about -ffat-lto-objects: " This option is effective only
> when compiling with -flto and is ignored at link time".
> I'd think that it's supposed to always work with -flto.
>
Was -ffat-lto-objects added together with -flto?
--
H.J.