aaron.ballman added a comment. In D126984#3579842 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126984#3579842>, @jdoerfert wrote:
> In D126984#3571573 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126984#3571573>, @aeubanks > wrote: > >> IIRC in the past there was a strong preference to not have the pass manager >> support this sort of thing >> if you want to support this, there should be an RFC for how the optimization >> part of this will work as it may require invasive changes to the LLVM pass >> manager >> >> (if this is purely a clang frontend thing then ignore me) > > We actually should *not* make this a clang frontend only thing. It is > confusing and not helpful. That said, we have code to integrate this into the > new PM already as we were planning on proposing something along these lines > too. We didn't manage to get to it during last years GSoC but the code could > be used as a basis still. > > +1 for RFC > strong preference for proper integration of this into the new PM. I'm not opposed to an RFC to extend this functionality, but it seems to me that we have incremental progress already with this patch and landing this patch unblocks the work @steplong was originally doing for the MSVC pragma. Do you have a concern if we move forward with this less-functional form so that work isn't held up on an RFC for the more fully functional form? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D126984/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D126984 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
