rovka added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td:4131 def : Flag<["-"], "no-integrated-as">, Alias<fno_integrated_as>, - Flags<[CC1Option, NoXarchOption]>; + Flags<[CC1Option,FlangOption,NoXarchOption]>; ---------------- awarzynski wrote: > unterumarmung wrote: > > Why not to add `FC1Option` here and elsewhere like it's done for > > `CC1Option`? > I'm not 100% sure what `-fno-integrated-as` controls in Clang's frontend > driver, `clang -cc1`. I'm guessing that it might related to using/not-using > LLVM's MCAsmParser. Perhaps for inline assembly? > > In Flang, I'm only focusing on `-save-temps` for which I need to make sure > that we don't try to call `flang-new -fc1as` or something similar (it does > not exist). Instead, `-save-temps` will have to rely on an external assembler. > > So, we basically don't require -`fno-integrated-as` in `flang-new -fc1` just > yet (that's what `FC1Option` is for - marking an option as available in the > frontend driver). I'm not 100% sure either (haven't looked at the code), but my understanding of `-fno-integrated-as` is that it forces clang to call the system assembler as opposed to using the LLVM libraries to generate machine code directly. Since flang never uses the system assembler, I would say the integrated assembler is always on in flang. So I'm not convinced it makes sense to add this flag to the driver, unless we're actually adding a `-fc1as`. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D124669/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D124669 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
