New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 674310 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 593874
Owner:
Closed: Jul 2017
Cc:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

Link Chrome on Linux with libc++, statically, with LTO

Project Member Reported by krasin@chromium.org, Dec 14 2016

Issue description

Currently, we have a lot of types in the standard C++ library excluded from CFI, because they are in the shared libstdc++ library. We need to link libc++ statically so that these types are covered by CFI too.

Realistically, this depends on implementing more devirtualization techniques than we have now, as I expect the standard library to have a number of cases of the code where CFI imposes a huge tax (and that can be avoided with better optimizations)
 

Comment 1 by thakis@chromium.org, Dec 14 2016

Cc: xyzzyz@chromium.org
xyzzyz might work on converting linux to libc++ (which we want to do anyhow for  bug 593874 ), we talked about that just today.

Comment 2 by kcc@chromium.org, Feb 28 2017

xyzzyz@, do you have any plans here? 

Comment 3 by xyzzyz@chromium.org, Feb 28 2017

I think the plan is to follow through with the original approach, that is, ship precompiled static libcxx.a and libcxxabi.a libraries with Clang. I've been pretty busy recently though, unfortunately.

Comment 4 by kcc@chromium.org, Feb 28 2017

>> ship precompiled static libcxx.a and libcxxabi.a
That won't work for our use case where we need to build chrome and libcxx*.a
together with LTO. 

>> I've been pretty busy recently though, unfortunately.
:( 

Comment 5 by kcc@chromium.org, Feb 28 2017

Summary: Link Chrome on Linux with libc++, statically, with LTO (was: Link Chrome on Linux with libc++)

Comment 6 by thakis@chromium.org, Feb 28 2017

> That won't work for our use case where we need to build chrome and libcxx*.a
together with LTO.

It will, you'll just get less LTO, right? I think it's better to make some progress (modern c++ headers) instead of not making progress on trying to solve all the problems at once.

Comment 7 by kcc@chromium.org, Feb 28 2017

> It will, you'll just get less LTO, right? 
Not only less LTO, but also less CFI. 


> I think it's better to make some progress
Of course! 

Comment 8 by kcc@chromium.org, May 5 2017

Cc: -p...@chromium.org
Owner: p...@chromium.org

Comment 9 by kcc@chromium.org, Jul 17 2017

dup of 593874?
Mergedinto: 593874
Status: Duplicate (was: Untriaged)
Yup, turned out that way in the end.

Sign in to add a comment