-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 440
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: add 'manual' option for //rust/settings/lto
#3120
Open
ParkMyCar
wants to merge
2
commits into
bazelbuild:main
Choose a base branch
from
ParkMyCar:lto-manual
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if we go with this approach, we should fix the conditions around line 110 and 113
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can definitely iterate! Are you referring to the
elif format == "only_bitcode"
condition?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was referring to these which are not working today correctly. If we choose this approach we should fix the below conditions according to the new behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sweet, more than happy to change these if you can describe how they're broken? If you can share an error message you're getting from a build that would be great!
I ask because I've tested all variants of the LTO setting on a relatively large project that links a few large C libraries (e.g.
librdkafka
,rocksdb
,openssl
) and all of the builds succeed?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I mean that they logically wrong. (enable
embed-bitcode=no
foroff
andunspecified
, don't set anything forobject_and_bitcode
format)Based on what you are proposing it should look something like this in my opinion:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see, thanks for pointing this out!
As-is the existing implementation is logically the same as you've written here. I think where the disconnect comes from is how "unspecified" and "off" are still referenced w.r.t.
format
. In a previous iteration of the original PR they were formats but I realized that was confusing, so I changed_determine_lto_object_format
to return one of "only_object", "only_bitcode", or "object_and_bitcode". "unspecified" and "off" already map to "only_object" but making this clearer is a good call!