jhuber6 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:8465-8470
+ if (TC->getTriple().isAMDGPU()) {
+ for (StringRef Feature : llvm::split(Arch.split(':').second, ':')) {
+ FeatureArgs.emplace_back(
+ Args.MakeArgString(Feature.take_back() + Feature.drop_back()));
+ }
+ }
----------------
saiislam wrote:
> May be use `parseTargetIDWithFormatCheckingOnly()`?
I tried that but it didn't return the strings in the format required by `llc`
for the `-mattrs` list.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:8475
"triple=" + TC->getTripleString(),
- "arch=" + Arch.str(),
+ "arch=" + getProcessorFromTargetID(TC->getTriple(), Arch).str(),
"kind=" + Kind.str(),
----------------
saiislam wrote:
> Shouldn't Arch (targetID here) should be passed along instead of just the
> processor?
>
> For example, `gfx90a:xnack+` and `gfx90a:xnack-` should be treated
> differently.
So the problem there is that this will cause us to no longer link in something
like the OpenMP runtime library since `gfx90a` != `gfx90a:xnack+`. Right now
the behavior is that we will link them both together since the architecture
matches but then the attributes will get resolved the same way we handle
`-mattr=+x,-x`. I'm not sure what the expected behaviour is here.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D150998/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D150998
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
