================
@@ -4290,6 +4291,18 @@ class FirConverter : public
Fortran::lower::AbstractConverter {
assert(blockId == 0 && "invalid blockId");
assert(activeConstructStack.empty() && "invalid construct stack state");
+ // Set target_cpu and target_features attributes to be passed through to
the
+ // llvm.func operation during lowering.
+ const llvm::TargetMachine &targetMachine = bridge.getTargetMachine();
+ if (auto targetCPU = targetMachine.getTargetCPU(); !targetCPU.empty())
+ func->setAttr("target_cpu",
+ mlir::StringAttr::get(func.getContext(), targetCPU));
+
+ if (auto targetFeatures = targetMachine.getTargetFeatureString();
+ !targetFeatures.empty())
+ func->setAttr("target_features", mlir::LLVM::TargetFeaturesAttr::get(
+ func.getContext(), targetFeatures));
----------------
kiranchandramohan wrote:
I am OK with it being here.
But as you can imagine there could be other opinions and also the fact that
some function attributes are added in lowering, some in passes and what is the
right place to do this for a future function attribute.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78289
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
