aaron.ballman added a comment. In D125723#3550956 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D125723#3550956>, @steplong wrote:
> Appreciate the help! It's not clear to me how to go from the strings "Os", > "foo1", "foo2", "foo3" to adding "-Os -ffoo1 -ffoo2 -ffoo3" to the > compilation line for that function I may be misunderstanding the issue here, but what I had envisioned was that the `OptimizeAttr` would take either a string or integer argument (I don't know how easy that will be to model in Attr.td, FWIW; it may require adding a new kind of `Argument` for attributes) and then add a "fake" `Argument` or use the `AdditionalMembers` field to add a member that stores the converted "value" of that string or integer in whatever form makes the most sense for the semantics (I was envisioning an enumeration for the various kinds of optimization options, but maybe that doesn't work for the -f arguments?). Then, when doing CodeGen, you can look at the function to see if it has an `OptimizeAttr`, and if it does, use the fake/additional member to determine what information to lower to IR (or not lower, as the case may be). Does that help get you unstuck somewhat? Btw, one possibility would be to not support any -f flags initially and only support optimization levels, if that's easier. We can add support for individual flags at a later step but still get utility out of the attribute this way. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D125723/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D125723 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
