xbolva00 added a comment. In D126984#3581708 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D126984#3581708>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> 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? I was thinking about this again and I am more and more unsure about this feature. -Os/-Oz is something more than just some attribute. Look here: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.cpp and see lines (conditions) with SizeLevel and OptLevel. 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
