On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 09:12:30 GMT, Matthias Baesken <mbaes...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > Absence of benchmarking and given the relatively small footprint savings, I > > don't think we should switch to SIZE. LTO seems fine. I don't know of any > > negative impacts with using it. > > @TheShermanTanker , @magicus what do you think ? Should we additionally offer > LTO on library level ? See > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/make/common/native/Flags.gmk#L43 > > Currently we only have it as an additional option for libjvm and not the > other native libs . I'm not sure what that line in Flags.gmk has to do with LTO support, since it's setting the optimization levels. That said, while I'm in favour of an option that you can set to enable LTO for native JDK code (Like I have in my fork), I don't think we should do it piece by piece like this, as Kim mentioned. This probably needs to be part of a more focused effort ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23563#issuecomment-2681314114
