From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33709395D87; Mon, 18 May 2026 21:37:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779140222; cv=none; b=aD/rqOqiCO7GjgvG4BjH19UVa2noDn9Z9Rr8MCtoggyG7RNgFhMyBTwh0nGxkLRcd9LZbfcmNqZvTO6vMrn0Vml7DaiDm1QvtwfAqAPsg3L+C0930DoPkSbQHhA4AMux6225FuyeB0H0O+fWDy3fWljA+tDuBogByNO8m7kf9Rc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779140222; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4nv5rnSbZUVjuOBpqPxTJjSgHYNHe6C8ctMOzyMdjsI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=shJvKUYM+lpjvNgnPdSMV0b+EJ8/pqdyxW+5o/5wXG2dpjo7HzDrmi0Avem7eP58pJF/zzF1x/9LSje5CgInEPh6ZykIAqlc9oP6pDkEf6zIIhW811V0KKD3VdloDCTVIdc7M+z+BVLeWy09FlBiwmvm2eJhW1Iukf8UxQcxcNg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=eM/WmYoZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="eM/WmYoZ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3AF8AC2BCB7; Mon, 18 May 2026 21:37:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1779140221; bh=4nv5rnSbZUVjuOBpqPxTJjSgHYNHe6C8ctMOzyMdjsI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=eM/WmYoZu1QRLdNR7w6WeqHdf88CTXBOKN6Nb39pWXRSmJVdx51PUijJLsiO+DOtn 1OfbktZgELk10ZHUbNb0YB/4OUu45pavsoD6rc5hYUEqLASlN7mEZ/Rc5wRi1RukG1 M9F6osA2+3A14uba/Blx2pXzCkskeWOneBKhbkG/qbWCnYjWAnFBHhlB4ONMZMmpEh c0LMvvRUUfs5b3MWdW259YBm5S7fM54thQQ20+ciNLNo4opAktdbo5R2OHI3X1HtTN Ec7lNCUkH4Pq91xwvXhHxvili+906oHzi5J9Fl+I6Lo5KKpEx0CloQUJMlR7gVSGkp GjBLPPqi2c0oQ== Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 14:36:57 -0700 From: Nathan Chancellor To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Nicolas Schier , Bill Wendling , Justin Stitt , Nick Desaulniers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/16] arch/Kconfig: Remove tautological conditions from HAS_LTO_CLANG Message-ID: <20260518213657.GC3979157@ax162> References: <20260517-bump-minimum-supported-llvm-version-to-17-v2-0-b3b8cda46bdd@kernel.org> <20260517-bump-minimum-supported-llvm-version-to-17-v2-5-b3b8cda46bdd@kernel.org> <6e555229-ae10-4304-ac1c-3cb02278f77f@app.fastmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6e555229-ae10-4304-ac1c-3cb02278f77f@app.fastmail.com> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 09:56:20AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Semi-related to this: we discussed a few years ago that we may one > day no longer need both full-lto and thin-lto. > > Is there still a need to keep supporting full-lto with clang-17+, > or can we expect everyone to use the thin version thee days? I believe there are still folks using full LTO, as I think that there is still some performance to be gained from using full LTO over thin LTO, but I am not sure. -- Cheers, Nathan