hans added a subscriber: rnk. hans added a comment. > In D82862#2498785 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D82862#2498785>, @hans wrote: > >> The motivation for my change was really just to make ThinLTO compiles work >> the same as non-ThinLTO ones. >> >> Maybe the fact that -x86-asm-syntax=intel doesn't affect inline asm is a >> bug. I wasn't aware that Clang and GCC's -masm= flags behaved differently in >> that way, but that certainly suggests there's a problem here. > > So I'm wondering, if I remove the above setAssemblerDialect line **and** > revert this commit, we should have inline asm (both module-level and GNU > function-leve) respect the target-selected asm dialect variant both for > ThinLTO and non-ThinLTO, so they should match again. Would that also solve > the problem you were originally tracking?
Not completely, because clang-cl sets -x86-asm-syntax=intel to enable intel-style asm in assembly listing output. We'd have to find another way of doing that without affecting the inline asm dialect. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D82862/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D82862 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
