craig.topper added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Arch/X86.cpp:200
+ if (!Args.hasArg(options::OPT_mno_lvi_cfi)) {
+ Features.push_back("+lvi-cfi");
+ LVIOpt = options::OPT_mlvi_cfi;
----------------
sconstab wrote:
> zbrid wrote:
> > sconstab wrote:
> > > Would it be better to add `FeatureLVIControlFlowIntegrity` as a
> > > dependency for `FeatureSpeculativeExecutionSideEffectSuppression` in
> > > `llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86.td`?
> > Thanks for the tip! Yeah, I will update to do that, but it looks like that
> > only ensures an error will be thrown if they aren't used together rather
> > than ensuring one is enabled when the other is enabled. Am I
> > misunderstanding?
> I'm not certain about this either. @craig.topper opinion?
Making them dependent in X86.td will make +sese imply +lvi-cfi and make
-lvi-cfi imply -sese. So sese can never be enabled without lvi-cfi also enabled.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D79910/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D79910
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
