khchen added a comment. In D106347#2890123 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106347#2890123>, @jrtc27 wrote:
> Why can't we just save target-features itself as a module flag instead of > inventing yet another equivalent encoding? Especially since a long bitfield > is brittle, you can't reorder or remove elements without breaking bitcode > compatibility. I think the benefit of using bitfield is making link behavior simpler. I will try to investigate another link behavior to handle two different target-features strings especially have `+` or `-`. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106347/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106347 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
