[llvm-dev] Redefining optnone to help LTO

[Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev]

As someone who spent rather a lot of effort getting optnone done in the
first place, let me say explicitly that I support this redefinition.

> it seems like a good idea to remember that fact in an LTO compilation 

In fact the use-case is rather more compelling than I said.  One goal is
supporting cross-component IR analyses such as those needed for Call-Frame
Integrity, while still allowing one or more components to be compiled with
-O0 (and having LTO comply with the -O0 request).

I don't plan to do any of the actual work, but the idea WFM.
--paulr