[llvm-dev] (Thin)LTO llvm build

[Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, 2:38 PM Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Sure, I will try this and let you know. Unfortunately, though, I
> > have another big work commitment that is going to eat up most of my
> > time through Thu, although I may be able to find some time to try
> > it.
>
> No worries, if I get around it before you do, I will :).
>
> > I think so - what is confusing me is that your cmake command is
> > specifying the same $PREFIX for both the install destination and the
> > source of the llvm-ar/llvm-ranlib that will be used in the new
> > build. Should the llvm-ar/llvm-ranlib in the cmake command use your
> > moved-to PREFIX instead?
>
> Only if 'ninja install` would reference the two executables. If that's
> case, and I haven't gotten that far yet due to ThinLTO not finishing,
> I'll consider copying those to the local build tree first.
>
> > Can you nm the .so files in your lib dir and see if any reference
> > __morestack?
>
> $ for so in lib/*.so; do echo $so ; nm $so|grep __morestack;done
> lib/BugpointPasses.so
> lib/libclang.so
> lib/libgomp.so
> lib/libiomp5.so
> lib/liblldb.so
>                  U __morestack
> lib/libLTO.so
> lib/libomp.so
> lib/LLVMgold.so
> lib/LLVMHello.so
> lib/LLVMPolly.so
>
> Looks like liblldb.so does. Does that explain anything?
>

Interesting, it doesn't in my build. Let me think about what might trigger
that difference...

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160927/70d9b6fc/attachment.html>