On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 8:40 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello! >> >>> Ping. >>>> Ping. >>>>> Ping. >>>>>> Ping. >> >> It would probably help reviewers if you pointed to actual path >> submission [1], which unfortunately contains the explanation in the >> patch itself [2], which further explains that this functionality is >> currently only supported with gold, patched with [3]. >> >> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00645.html >> [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/txt2CHtu81P1O.txt >> [3] https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2014-05/msg00092.html >> >> After a bit of the above detective work, I think that new gcc option >> is not necessary. The configure should detect if new functionality is >> supported in the linker, and auto-configure gcc to use it when >> appropriate. > > I think GCC option is needed since one can use -fuse-ld= to > change linker.
IMO, nobody will use this highly special x86_64-only option. It would be best for gnu-ld to reach feature parity with gold as far as this functionality is concerned. In this case, the optimization would be auto-configured, and would fire automatically, without any user intervention. Uros.
