sdesmalen added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:5052-5055
+ if (isa<BackendJobAction>(JA)) {
+ CmdArgs.push_back("-mllvm");
+ CmdArgs.push_back("-treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning");
+ }
----------------
paulwalker-arm wrote:
> Are there any concerns related to LTO here? Could we live with LTO triggering
> errors for the invalid uses? Part of me thinks this is reasonable given the
> clang exception is more about ensuring we can continue active development
> until we're ready to press the "it's supported" switch.
> Are there any concerns related to LTO here?
Yes, probably.
> Could we live with LTO triggering errors for the invalid uses? Part of me
> thinks this is reasonable given the clang exception is more about ensuring we
> can continue active development until we're ready to press the "it's
> supported" switch.
Yes, that's my thinking about this as well. When the compiler is ready to be
used in production, then an actual runtime compiler error (the default) would
be appropriate which would lead to a bug-report that'd we need to go off and
fix. During development of scalable vector support, we just want to have some
extra flexibility, because we know not all code-paths are covered. So while we
use it for those purposes, the recommendation is not to use LTO.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98856/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98856
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
