arsenm added a comment. In D130096#3815529 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130096#3815529>, @jhuber6 wrote:
> The best solution would be to handle these per-TU variables in the backend. > Or maybe even all of these could be placed in the backend where the code > paths that currently require a control constant could be a simple attribute > that the backend will use to control code emission. I'd prefer to avoid spreading special treatment of the device libraries into the backend. The contract is poorly defined and spread around too much as it is Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D130096/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D130096 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
