llvm dev - Oct 2014 - [LLVMdev] [lld] lld build needs to have flags that specify what flavor/targets to build ?

Hi,

I think lld needs to have an infrastructure as part of the build process 
to build specific flavors and specific targets.

For this I was thinking that the Registry expand to consider flavors and 
targets that are part of the build process.

So each flavor/target would register and the Driver would walk through 
the list of handlers to check if there is a handler defined for that 
flavor/target.

Does this sound like the right design to do ?

Shankar Easwaran

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by the
Linux Foundation

Shankar,

Can you give provide a scenario where you want this?  I’m not sure what you want
here.


On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think lld needs to have an infrastructure as part of the build process to
build specific flavors and specific targets.
This sounds like you want config-time choices (e.g. build a linker to only
support ELF/x86 such as for a JIT).
> 
> For this I was thinking that the Registry expand to consider flavors and
targets that are part of the build process.
> 
> So each flavor/target would register and the Driver would walk through the
list of handlers to check if there is a handler defined for that flavor/target.
This sounds like you want everything decided at runtime (e.g. all flavors
registers all readers).

-Nick

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote:
> Shankar,
>
> Can you give provide a scenario where you want this?  I’m not sure what
> you want here.
>
Yes, that's my question too.

>
> On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at
codeaurora.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think lld needs to have an infrastructure as part of the build
process
> to build specific flavors and specific targets.
> This sounds like you want config-time choices (e.g. build a linker to only
> support ELF/x86 such as for a JIT).
>
> >
> > For this I was thinking that the Registry expand to consider flavors
and
> targets that are part of the build process.
> >
> > So each flavor/target would register and the Driver would walk through
> the list of handlers to check if there is a handler defined for that
> flavor/target.
> This sounds like you want everything decided at runtime (e.g. all flavors
> registers all readers).
>
> -Nick
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20141007/c998a857/attachment.html>

On 10/7/2014 4:10 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote:
> Shankar,
>
> Can you give provide a scenario where you want this?  I’m not sure what you
want here.
a) LLVM could be built  just for one target(LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD)
b) With LTO this case might happen more often, where an user would have 
compiled LLVM just for one architecture and lld would support other 
architectures that LLVM would not support.
c) Printing all the targets/flavors that the linker currently supports.

On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org> 
wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think lld needs to have an infrastructure as part of the build
process to build specific flavors and specific targets.
> This sounds like you want config-time choices (e.g. build a linker to only
support ELF/x86 such as for a JIT).
Yes.
>> For this I was thinking that the Registry expand to consider flavors
and targets that are part of the build process.
>>
>> So each flavor/target would register and the Driver would walk through
the list of handlers to check if there is a handler defined for that
flavor/target.
> This sounds like you want everything decided at runtime (e.g. all flavors
registers all readers).
Yes, right.

Shankar Easwaran

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by the
Linux Foundation