probinson added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46767#1096746, @rsmith wrote:
> Everything old is new again. If only that were true about my brain. :-P > This was discussed when `-fclang-abi-compat` was introduced; see > https://reviews.llvm.org/D36501 for the argument why this patch is the wrong > way of modeling an ABI. Forcing the `ClangABICompat` language option as a way > of "tricking" Clang into producing the PS4 ABI is a hack. The various ABI > changes that `-fclang-abi-compat=` controls are simply part of the PS4 ABI, > and that knowledge should idealistically be carried by the CodeGen (etc) code > that knows about PS4, rather than by imagining that there is some other PS4 > ABI that Clang would produces at version `Latest`, and that we're asking for > a compatibility version of it. Muchas gracias for the reminder of the previous discussion; it's quite true that on our side we have not done our due diligence in making sure that upstream Clang fully supports the PS4 ABI, and that `-fclang-abi-compat` is the wrong way to do this. It needs to become part of my team's consciousness and collective memory that these sorts of expedient hacks are the wrong approach. > This will go wrong if we ever release (or have ever released) a Clang version > that fails to properly implement the PS4 ABI. Yeah, we crossed that bridge years ago, but nobody has been brave enough to try to deliver that patch upstream. Actually I think there are two, but as they typically don't cause any merge conflicts they're not at top-of-mind for anybody, even me. > However, we should not issue a warning for use of the flag. Remember that the > flag means "please be ABI-compatible with Clang version X.Y". Because all > versions of Clang that target PS4 use the same ABI, the flag is a no-op on > that target (at least for now, until we accidentally introduce an ABI break). > So we should not be warning on it, just silently accepting it and doing what > it says -- which for now is nothing. Got it. I'll take an action to straighten this one out. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D46767 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
