On Fri, Sep 04, 2026 at 04:39:30PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via devel wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2026 at 04:05:01PM +0200, Florian Weimer via devel wrote:
> > * Benjamin Beasley:
> > 
> > > On the other hand, if this change is less about packages that
> > > currently can’t use LTO and more about trying to save build time for
> > > packages that already successfully build with fat LTO objects, then
> > > how much builder time can be saved? And what, if any, effect on the
> > > performance of the compiled programs can be expected? If this is a
> > > compile-time/runtime performance tradeoff, it’s hard to make an
> > > informed decision without knowing what is being traded for what.
> > 
> > Assuming this is about not using -ffat-lto-objects with GCC, there
> > should not be a change in generated machine code as a result of this.
> > It just drops non-LTO code generation that we currently discard anyway.
> 
> We don't discard it in all cases though.
> It is ignored when linking binaries/shared libraries with -flto and where
> the LTO sections are present too.
> We strip the LTO sections in *.a libraries included in packages (or in the
> rare case where packages include *.o objects), and in that case without
> -ffat-lto-objects it wouldn't work at all.
> 
> So, sure, we could drop -ffat-lto-objects for packages which don't include
> in %files any *.a/*.o files (most of them), but packages which include those
> (even when just in some binary subpackages) wouldn't work without it (or one
> would need to judge what should be compiled with that flag and what can
> avoid it depending on in what it will be linked or archived).

In that case, shouldn't this approach be inverted:
- drop -ffat-lto-objects by default
- add '%global _lto_cflags %_lto_flags_fat'
- add a test either in CI or in rpmlint that no empty .a/.o files are being
  shipped in the package.
- fix any packages that _do_ require fat lto objects to use
  '%global _lto_cflags %_lto_flags_fat'.

Then we should get more efficient builds for the 99% of packages that don't
ship .a/.o. Some packages would need to be adjusted, but the help would help
find cases that need the adjustment.

Zbyszek
-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new

Reply via email to