Nov 5, 2025 11:40:46 PM Jonathan Yong <[email protected]>: > On 10/31/25 4:28 PM, LIU Hao wrote: >> 在 2025-10-31 19:53, Richard Biener 写道: >>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 12:34 PM Peter0x44 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2025-10-31 08:40, Richard Biener wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 2:25 AM Peter Damianov <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> … >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for working on this! Can you state how you tested this? In >>>>> particular, >>>>> does LTO now work with BigObj objects (and regular COFF objects still >>>>> work >>>>> with LTO)? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Richard. >>>> >>>> I tested this by linking some programs with LTO using both -Wa,-mbig-obj >>>> and without it. >>>> They all worked. >>>> >>>> I'm also building a w64devkit with this patch: >>>> https://github.com/Peter0x44/w64devkit/ >>>> commit/42452901a1eb31768d3c27d824e8a741125f4c04 >>>> >>>> w64devkit patches binutils to always emit bigobj, so this should >>>> exercise it well. >>>> Afterwards, I can test if it functions on the windows host too. >>> >>> The patch is OK. Please leave the maintainers you CCed the chance >>> to chime in before pushing though (until early next week). >>> >>> >> I have bootstrapped GCC on {i686,x86_64}-w64-mingw32 with `-Wa,-mbig- obj` >> in {C,CXX}FLAGS, and tried building some C and C++ test programs with `-flto >> -Wa,-mbig-obj` (which failed without this patch), and seen no issue so far. >> >> > > I will push soon if there are no more comments.
The commit message itself needed a change to mention the PR number. Otherwise it's fine. Maybe I should try to get approved to push commits myself?
