hoy added a comment. In D93656#2468841 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D93656#2468841>, @aeubanks wrote:
> In D93656#2468834 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D93656#2468834>, @hoy wrote: > >> In D93656#2468821 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D93656#2468821>, @aeubanks wrote: >> >>> Also it looks like this is doing 2 different things, the moving of things >>> from Clang to LLVM's PassBuilder, and separately the change to the pass >>> itself. Can these be separated? >> >> I'm not sure about a good way to separate them. There are Clang tests that >> may fail with removing the pass from clang while not adding it >> correspondingly in llvm. Adding the pass in llvm while not removing it from >> Clang may cause the pass to run twice which may also fail the Clang tests. >> What do you think? > > I mean keep that in one change, but separate out the change to > llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/UniqueInternalLinkageNames.cpp and > DebugInfoMetadata.h. I see, thanks for the clarification. In D93656#2468698 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D93656#2468698>, @dblaikie wrote: > This should have a LLVM test coverage for the LLVM changes. (I realize > they're also tested by the Clang test, because there's no way to test Clang's > pass manager creation short of testing the effect of running the pass manager > (hmm - /maybe/ there's a way to dump the pass pipeline? In which case that's > how Clang should be tested, just testing that it creates the right pipeline, > not that that pipeline does any particular thing)) Added an IR test. There is the llvm switch `-debug-pass=` that can dump the pass pipeline. I'm not aware of a clang switch that can do that. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D93656/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D93656 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
