On 1/13/25 5:31 AM, Julian Waters wrote:
I think it might be worthwhile to pursue later on, rather than now,
when everyone is just coming back from the new year's celebrations and
probably have a lot of other work to deal with. Just in case I
misunderstood you, by Project do you just mean setting
I think it might be worthwhile to pursue later on, rather than now,
when everyone is just coming back from the new year's celebrations and
probably have a lot of other work to deal with. Just in case I
misunderstood you, by Project do you just mean setting some time aside
at a later date to work on
We've recently been getting a number of JBS issues filed that relate to
building with LTO (e.g. configure with
--enable-jvm-feature-link-time-opt). It
looks to me as if LTO is not even close to actually working. Rather than
deal
with this piecemeal at this seemingly random time, it seems to me
8292226: Prepare make for better Link Time Optimization support
Reviewed-by: ihse
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9829
On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 16:45:21 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do
>> with some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc
>> and sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a
>> first
On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 16:45:21 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do
>> with some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc
>> and sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a
>> first
> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do with
> some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc and
> sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a first
> step, it would be good to simply supply the appropriate flags
> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do with
> some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc and
> sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a first
> step, it would be good to simply supply the appropriate flags
> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do with
> some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc and
> sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a first
> step, it would be good to simply supply the appropriate flags
On Thu, 11 Aug 2022 08:08:02 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> But I think we may end up just removing this anyway.
You never know for certain if this might come in handy in the future ;)
> make/hotspot/lib/JvmFeatures.gmk line 173:
>
>> 171: ifeq ($(call check-jvm-feature, link-time-opt), true)
>> 1
> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do with
> some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc and
> sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a first
> step, it would be good to simply supply the appropriate flags
On Thu, 11 Aug 2022 04:18:58 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
> The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do with
> some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc and
> sets the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a first
> step
The support for Link Time Optimization in the JDK's make system could do with
some cleaning up, at the moment it simply assumes the compiler is gcc and sets
the flags as such. Instead of introducing changes in bulk, as a first step, it
would be good to simply supply the appropriate flags dependi
13 matches
Mail list logo
