RetroSearch Browse

Wed Aug 9 05:16:36 EDT 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-August/148811.html

There is already a ./configure --with-lto flag, why not using it?

I'm using --with-lto without PGO for months, I never noticed that the
option is fully ignored!

Victor

2017-08-09 9:52 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:36:28 +1000
> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 8 August 2017 at 10:12, Gregory P. Smith <greg at krypto.org> wrote:
>> > I don't know whether it is beneficial or not - but having the capability to
>> > build LTO without PGO seems reasonable. I can review any pull requests
>> > altering configure.ac and Makefile.pre.in to make such a change.
>>
>> Being able to separate them seems useful even if it's just from the
>> performance research perspective of comparing "PGO only", "LTO only"
>> and "PGO+LTO".
>
> That does not mean "LTO only" deserves a configure option, though.  PGO
> is difficult to set up manually so it's fair that we provide dedicated
> build support for it.  LTO should just be a matter of tweaking CFLAGS
> and LDFLAGS.
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/victor.stinner%40gmail.com

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-August/148811.html below:

[Python-Dev] first post introduction and question regarding lto