Re: -flto to become more of a routine - any change in opinion since 2011?
Hallo,
* Konstantin Demin [Wed, Mar 30 2016, 09:14:20AM]:
> 1. LTO object format is not stable and ABI-persistent: e.g., LTO
> objects compiled with gcc 5.2 may not work when using gcc 5.3
> (versions are just for example). Ref: gcc doc.
> 2. Slim LTO objects are usable only with GCC of same version (see
> above). To provide wider support, you'll need to ship fat LTO objects.
> 3. LTO is usable in most cases, but not all. AFAIK, Linux kernel won't
> build with LTO.
IMO it's worse. I have at least one package where LTO seems to cause
valgrind errors (related to pthread) in release build (-O2) but not in
debug mode without optimization.
At least it compiles today with gcc-5.x without issues. With 4.x, there
were either creepy linking errors or the program was not running stable
(semi random crashes, probably related to the mentioned valgrind
findings).
Regards,
Eduard.
Reply to: