chandlerc added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33525#766050, @timshen wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33525#764251, @chandlerc wrote: > > > (focusing on the LLVM side of this review for now) > > > > Can you add an LLVM-based test? Can you add this to > > `lib/Passes/PassRegistry.def`? > > > Talked offline. Given the fact that BitcodeWriter (and possibly assembly > writer?) is not registered either, it seems to be a larger issue that's out > of the scope of this patch. While *generic* testing is out of scope, I think you need at least *some* testing of this in this patch. It can be an option directly in the `llvm-lto` tool or a direct option in the `opt` tool itself, but we shouldn't add a bunch of code to LLVM that can only ever be exercised by using some other tool. https://reviews.llvm.org/D33525 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
