Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1430955
| From | Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Is LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() still needed? |
| Date | 2016-06-24 23:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rNGwp-4Xb-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rNmo1-it-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
> But nothing quite obviously setting these upstream. I'm probably just > missing something obvious though. Either way I figured now would be a > good time to ask as I have other code that would use this, the linker > table stuff I've been working. If we can avoid propagating more use of > LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() then great. If we still need it its probably > good to document this a bit more as can't see anything super clear. It was a work around for a gcc 4.7 LTO problem. I guess it could be dropped by now. Yes I've been slow in submitting the LTO patches, even though they have a quite active out of tree user base. Will try to do better. -Andi
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() still needed? "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-06-24 01:40 +0200
Re: Is LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() still needed? Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> - 2016-06-24 23:10 +0200
Re: Is LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() still needed? "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-06-28 02:50 +0200
[PATCH] x86: remove LTO flags "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-07-07 02:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] x86: remove LTO flags Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> - 2016-07-07 04:00 +0200
[PATCH v2] x86: remove LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-07-07 18:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] x86: remove LTO_REFERENCE_INITCALL() Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> - 2016-07-07 18:40 +0200
csiph-web