pirama added inline comments.
================
Comment at: cmake/caches/Android-stage2.cmake:37
+ set(RUNTIMES_${target}-linux-android_COMPILER_RT_INCLUDE_TESTS OFF CACHE
BOOL "")
+ set(RUNTIMES_${target}-linux-android_LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS ON CACHE BOOL "")
+ set(RUNTIMES_${target}-linux-android_LLVM_ENABLE_THREADS OFF CACHE BOOL "")
----------------
jroelofs wrote:
> pirama wrote:
> > Should we initialize it to LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS rather than defaulting to
> > ON? So assertions can be enabled/disabled for all targets with just one
> > switch (and then over-ride with per-target flags, if necessary).
> No. Absolutely not. Whether or not the bits of the toolchain that run on the
> host have assertions should be *completely* independent of whether the target
> bits do or don't. Do not conflate the host with the target.
Maybe I wasn't clear. I suggest that we don't set
RUNTIMES_${target}_LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS to ON here and rather initialize it
based on another flag. I was incorrect to suggest we reuse
LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS. We should rather have something like
ANDROID_RUNTIMES_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS.
The motivation is to reduce the number of additional flags/switches, under the
assumption that assert-enabled or assert-disabled builds of the runtimes are
generated simultaneously.
To generate assert-enabled builds, the invocation would be:
```
$ cmake ... -DANDROID_RUNTIMES_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON
```
instead of
```
$ cmake ... -DRUNTIMES_armv7-linux-android_LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON
-DRUNTIMES-aarch64-linux-android_LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON ...
```
If I understand CMake correctly, we can still enable assertions only for a
particular target by:
```
$ cmake ... -DANDROID_RUNTIMES_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=OFF
-DRUNTIMES-aarch64-linux-android_LLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON
```
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33561
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
