Remove -Wl,gdb-index.

Remove -Wl,gdb-index.

The common case build path does not include running things under a debugger.
Use gdb-add-index instead to generate the index section.

See this chromium-dev thread for background:
  https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/chromium-dev/CnRm0EIBp0E

BUG=374952
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=277210

[awong, 2014-06-13 19:27:29]

How will this interact with split-dwarf?

[Jeffrey Yasskin, 2014-06-13 19:47:32]

Eric assures us that split-dwarf is fine without gold-generated indices.

[awong, 2014-06-13 19:54:39]

On 2014/06/13 19:47:32, JeffreyYasskin (OOO til Jun23) wrote:
> Eric assures us that split-dwarf is fine without gold-generated indices.

Eric: feel like LGTMing?

[chromium-reviews, 2014-06-13 20:47:26]

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:54 PM, <ajwong@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2014/06/13 19:47:32, JeffreyYasskin (OOO til Jun23) wrote:
>
>> Eric assures us that split-dwarf is fine without gold-generated indices.
>>
>
> Eric: feel like LGTMing?
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/335903002/
>

To be clear it's fine, but will be slower unless you have a different way
of generating gdb indices.

(Will look at the patch as well, just wanted to make sure)

-eric

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[echristo.google, 2014-06-13 20:48:50]

On 2014/06/13 20:47:26, chromium-reviews wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:54 PM, <mailto:ajwong@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
> > On 2014/06/13 19:47:32, JeffreyYasskin (OOO til Jun23) wrote:
> >
> >> Eric assures us that split-dwarf is fine without gold-generated indices.
> >>
> >
> > Eric: feel like LGTMing?
> >
> > https://codereview.chromium.org/335903002/
> >
> 
> To be clear it's fine, but will be slower unless you have a different way
> of generating gdb indices.
> 
> (Will look at the patch as well, just wanted to make sure)
> 

LGTM with that caveat.

[awong, 2014-06-13 20:53:15]

The CQ bit was checked by ajwong@chromium.org

[awong, 2014-06-13 20:54:54]

On 2014/06/13 20:48:50, echristo1 wrote:
> On 2014/06/13 20:47:26, chromium-reviews wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:54 PM, <mailto:ajwong@chromium.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2014/06/13 19:47:32, JeffreyYasskin (OOO til Jun23) wrote:
> > >
> > >> Eric assures us that split-dwarf is fine without gold-generated indices.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Eric: feel like LGTMing?
> > >
> > > https://codereview.chromium.org/335903002/
> > >
> > 
> > To be clear it's fine, but will be slower unless you have a different way
> > of generating gdb indices.
> > 
> > (Will look at the patch as well, just wanted to make sure)
> > 
> 
> LGTM with that caveat.

Cool.  Yeah, I think people should actually generate indexes using the
gdb-add-index script

  https://codereview.chromium.org/330333005

Last I benchmarked it, the hit for -Wl,gdb-index is non-trivial (equivalent to
startup time for unindexed gdb) it having it on the common path w/o the debugger
doesn't make sense...

-Albert

[chromium-reviews, 2014-06-13 20:55:21]

SGTM.

-eric


On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:54 PM, <ajwong@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2014/06/13 20:48:50, echristo1 wrote:
>
>> On 2014/06/13 20:47:26, chromium-reviews wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:54 PM, <mailto:ajwong@chromium.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On 2014/06/13 19:47:32, JeffreyYasskin (OOO til Jun23) wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Eric assures us that split-dwarf is fine without gold-generated
>> indices.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Eric: feel like LGTMing?
>> > >
>> > > https://codereview.chromium.org/335903002/
>> > >
>> >
>> > To be clear it's fine, but will be slower unless you have a different
>> way
>> > of generating gdb indices.
>> >
>> > (Will look at the patch as well, just wanted to make sure)
>> >
>>
>
>  LGTM with that caveat.
>>
>
> Cool.  Yeah, I think people should actually generate indexes using the
> gdb-add-index script
>
>   https://codereview.chromium.org/330333005
>
> Last I benchmarked it, the hit for -Wl,gdb-index is non-trivial
> (equivalent to
> startup time for unindexed gdb) it having it on the common path w/o the
> debugger
> doesn't make sense...
>
> -Albert
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/335903002/
>

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-13 20:55:31]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ajwong@chromium.org/335903002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-13 20:55:32]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-13 20:55:33]

No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer or
a provisional committer, _not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[Nico, 2014-06-13 21:03:44]

lgtm with reference to chromium-dev thread

[awong, 2014-06-13 21:06:27]

The CQ bit was checked by ajwong@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-13 21:08:06]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ajwong@chromium.org/335903002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-14 08:48:21]

Change committed as 277210