On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 10:02:10AM -0800, Nico Weber wrote: > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:04:10PM -0800, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:12:40AM -0800, Nico Weber wrote: > > > >> Something like the attached patch? (Make-only again, but now > > including the > > > >> linux bits. If folks like it, I can do the cmake part as a followup.) > > > > > > > > Does it get applied for shared libraries? I don't think it makes sense > > > > in that situation. > > > > > > > > > > These have export lists etc. > > > > I mean: building the shared library code with -ffunction-section > > -fdata-section is just going to blow up the object files at best and > > make the linker slower. It's not really about exporting symbols. > > > > Much of the code (llvm core libs, clang core libs) is shared by many of the > tools (libclang, clang, clang-format, opt, etc). Since most of the tools > want stripping, the shared code needs to be built with these flags (or be > compiled twice for the different libs). Do you have measurements showing > that linking got slower for the targets you care about?
I don't understand your argument. If you build a shared library, everything from the corresponding static archive is included. There is no stripping for the individual tool involved. Joerg _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
