Hello.
The patch has moved to
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2016-June/119257.html (
http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/8176/)
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>
> > With gcc 5.3.1 I end up with lib{GL,OSMesa}.so @ 44M and
> > libswrAVX{,2}.so @ 70M. With flto turned on it drops WAY down to
> > lib{GL,OSMesa}.so @ 13M and libswrAVX{,2}.so @ 18M
>
> I assume those numbers are including debugging symbols? How do stripped
> binaries compare?
>
Silly me, I
Am Mittwoch, 1. Juni 2016, 12:36:15 CEST schrieb Eero Tamminen:
> Hi,
>
> On 31.05.2016 21:43, ⚛ wrote:
> > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Aaron Watry wrote:
> >> Given the header that it's failing in, I removed the --enable-glx-tls
> >> flag, and then things built
Hi,
On 31.05.2016 21:43, ⚛ wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Aaron Watry wrote:
Given the header that it's failing in, I removed the --enable-glx-tls flag, and
then things built successfully.
mesa.spec in
On 01.06.2016 00:07, Chuck Atkins wrote:
>
> With gcc 5.3.1 I end up with lib{GL,OSMesa}.so @ 44M and
> libswrAVX{,2}.so @ 70M. With flto turned on it drops WAY down to
> lib{GL,OSMesa}.so @ 13M and libswrAVX{,2}.so @ 18M
I assume those numbers are including debugging symbols? How do stripped
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Martin Peres wrote:
> On 31/05/16 10:42, Eero Tamminen wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 30.05.2016 20:57, Rob Clark wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>>>
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:28 AM, ⚛
On 31/05/16 21:26, ⚛ wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Chuck Atkins wrote:
Agreed. I've been building on both Fedora and EL7 for the past few months
with -flto and haven't seen any issues with the files in mapi. You reported
that you get build failures with
On 31/05/16 10:42, Eero Tamminen wrote:
Hi,
On 30.05.2016 20:57, Rob Clark wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:28 AM, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
This patch enables compilation with -flto.
The performance
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Aaron Watry wrote:
>
> Given the header that it's failing in, I removed the --enable-glx-tls flag,
> and then things built successfully.
mesa.spec in
http://download.clearlinux.org/releases/8490/clear/source/SRPMS/mesa-11.2.99.1-21.src.rpm
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Emil Velikov
wrote:
> On 30 May 2016 at 21:10, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Emil Velikov
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>> On 30 May 2016 at 18:28, ⚛
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Chuck Atkins wrote:
> Agreed. I've been building on both Fedora and EL7 for the past few months
> with -flto and haven't seen any issues with the files in mapi. You reported
> that you get build failures with gcc for this though so what
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 1:57 PM, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Emil Velikov
> wrote:
> > - Are you use the mapi hunk is needed ? last time I've tried (some
> > months ago, copying the tweaks from the Clearlinux spec file [2])
>
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 9:27 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
> - Are you use the mapi hunk is needed ? last time I've tried (some
> months ago, copying the tweaks from the Clearlinux spec file [2])
> things built without issues.
I tried Clearlinux today, but I failed to
I only build with swr and llvmpipe. I generally don't have use for the GPU
drivers so my configure line is typically:
--enable-opengl --disable-gles1 --disable-gles2
--disable-va --disable-gbm --disable-xvmc --disable-vdpau
--enable-shared-glapi
--disable-dri --with-dri-drivers=
On 31 May 2016 at 15:34, Chuck Atkins wrote:
> I've been using lto for the past several weeks not for performance reasons
> but to reduce the resulting binary size which has grown to be rather
> substantial. I usually set "-flto -ffat-lto-objects
>
I've been using lto for the past several weeks not for performance reasons
but to reduce the resulting binary size which has grown to be rather
substantial. I usually set "-flto -ffat-lto-objects
-flto-odr-type-merging" in the CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS env vars prior to
configure and have yet to
Hi,
On 30.05.2016 20:57, Rob Clark wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:28 AM, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
This patch enables compilation with -flto.
The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for
On May 30, 2016 1:31 PM, "Emil Velikov" wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2016 at 21:10, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Emil Velikov
wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi there,
>>> On 30 May 2016 at 18:28, ⚛
On 30 May 2016 at 21:10, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Emil Velikov
> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>> On 30 May 2016 at 18:28, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > This patch enables compilation with -flto.
>> >
>> > The
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Emil Velikov
wrote:
> Hi there,
> On 30 May 2016 at 18:28, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This patch enables compilation with -flto.
> >
> > The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for
> glxgears.
> >
Hi there,
On 30 May 2016 at 18:28, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch enables compilation with -flto.
>
> The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for glxgears.
> Performance changes in OpenGL games haven't been measured yet, my feeling is
> that they are
Ok, I found the answer to my question regarding the `-fno-lto`. IMHO that
should be in the commit message, since the patch only checks for availability
and disables LTO in one case, never enabling it explicitely.
Please ignore my previous mail.
Pierre
On 11:06 AM - May 30 2016, Matt Turner
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Pierre Moreau wrote:
> On 07:28 PM - May 30 2016, ⚛ wrote:
>> +if COMPILER_UNDERSTANDS_LTO
>> +CFLAGS += -fno-lto
>> +CXXFLAGS += -fno-lto
>
> This should be `-flto` if I’m not mistaken.
>
> Pierre
-fno-lto is correct because GCC has issues
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 11:02 AM, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:28 AM, <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > This patch enables compilation with -flto.
>> >
>> > The performance
On 07:28 PM - May 30 2016, ⚛ wrote:
> This patch enables compilation with -flto.
>
> The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for glxgears.
> Performance changes in OpenGL games haven't been measured yet, my feeling
> is that they are negligible.
> diff --git a/configure.ac
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:28 AM, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This patch enables compilation with -flto.
>>
>> The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for glxgears.
>> Performance changes in
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:28 AM, ⚛ <0xe2.0x9a.0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch enables compilation with -flto.
>
> The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for glxgears.
> Performance changes in OpenGL games haven't been measured yet, my feeling is
> that they are
This patch enables compilation with -flto.
The performance benefits of LTO (GCC 4.9 & 6.1) are about 1% for glxgears.
Performance changes in OpenGL games haven't been measured yet, my feeling
is that they are negligible.
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index fc0b1db..e84a1ad 100644
---
28 matches
Mail list logo