craig.topper added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CodeGenModule.cpp:1752 StringRef TargetCPU = getTarget().getTargetOpts().CPU; + StringRef TuneCPU = getTarget().getTargetOpts().TuneCPU; std::vector<std::string> Features; ---------------- erichkeane wrote: > Does this lead to a situation in 'attribute-target' where we have a 'tune' > setting to a processor that is 'before' the 'TargetCPU'? Should this enforce > some sort of hierarchy to make sure we only do it if it is 'newer' (read, > more feature rich) than the target? TuneCPU is only supposed to control microarchitectural things like should i prefer an "ADD 1" over "INC" instruction. Or should I use more immediate controlled shuffles over a single variable controlled shuffle. As such that things we get from tune don't have a straightforward relationship with architectural features. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85384/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85384 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
