search for: pr21471

> On Nov 14, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > +chrisb > >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >> >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 >> >> I have an initial patch (attached to this email) which e...

I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 I have an initial patch (attached to this email) which enables clang/llvm to recognize one c...

...least as far as the global TargetMachine options in the current work for Subtarget code generation - which is what some of this comes down to. I'll respond inline here: > > On Thu Nov 13 2014 at 4:35:08 PM Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. > > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 > > I have an initial patch (attached to this email) which enables clang/llv...

...2014, at 2:44 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < >> dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >> > >> > +chrisb >> > >> >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen >> command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level >> attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >> >> >> >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 >> >> >> >> I ha...

> On Nov 19, 2014, at 6:06 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > So I am deeply concerned about the direction this is taking. I'm trying to catch up on the thread, but I think Chris already highlighted my issue: > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Chris Bieneman <cbieneman at apple.com <mailto:cbieneman at apple.com>> wrote: >>>

...to the work we’re trying to do with cl::opt. > On Nov 14, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > +chrisb > >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >> >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 >> >> I have an initial patch (attached to this email) which e...

...>> dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > +chrisb >>>> > >>>> >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen >>>> command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level >>>> attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >>>> >> >>>> >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 >>...

...<dexonsmith at apple.com <mailto:dexonsmith at apple.com>> wrote: > > > > +chrisb > > > >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com <mailto:ahatanak at gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. > >> > >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 <http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471> > >> &...

...hat you have in mind? Just to give you an update, I've been working on new patches based on the feedback I've received so far and discussing how I should proceed from here with Bob and Duncan. As the first step, we are trying to classify the command line options listed in the attachment to PR21471 into categories based on whether they are module-level or function level attributes or whether they affect subtarget creation, etc. I'll probably start new threads on llvm-dev soon to discuss the option categories individually to have a more focused discussion. A couple of other questions: -...

....com <mailto:dexonsmith at apple.com>> wrote: >> > >> > +chrisb >> > >> >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com <mailto:ahatanak at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >> >> >> >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471 <http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21471> >&gt...

...> >>>>>>>>>> >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding >>>>>>>>>> codegen command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level >>>>>>>>>> attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >>>>>>>>>> >> >&...

...gt;>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> On 2014-Nov-13, at 16:33, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> I'm working on fixing PR21471, which is about embedding codegen >>>>>>>> command line options into the bitcode as function or module-level >>>>>>>> attributes so that they don't get ignored when doing LTO. >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>&...

I've been investigating what is needed to ensure command line options are passed to the backend codegen passes during LTO and enable compiling different functions in a module with different command line options (see the links below for previous discussions). http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/78855 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.devel/80456 The command