On 06.11.2008 21:21, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > Vincent Legoll wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Stefan Reinauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> Vincent Legoll wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Isn't all that kind of things doable via function pointers and link-time >>>> dead >>>> code elimination ? That would achieve the no ifdeffery goal, and may be >>>> cleaner code... >>>> >>>> >>> Link time optimization would suggest we look into compiling with LLVM >>> instead of gcc. >>> >>> >> I was believing that current linkers discarded code of unused functions. >> Would LLVM really be needed for that to happen ? Or are you thing of >> more involved optimizations ? >> >> > Any non-static functions in a file will stay in the final binary, unless > you do some trickery like -combine, but that usually requires some > changes to the build system. >
We already have CONFIG_WHOLE_PROGRAM_COMPILE in v3. I can make sure it is available for all stages. Right now it is only used for initram. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
