yaxunl added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/AMDGPU.cpp:717
AMDGPUToolChain::getGPUArch(const llvm::opt::ArgList &DriverArgs) const {
- return getProcessorFromTargetID(
- getTriple(), DriverArgs.getLastArgValue(options::OPT_mcpu_EQ));
+ if (DriverArgs.hasArg(options::OPT_mcpu_EQ))
+ return getProcessorFromTargetID(
----------------
jhuber6 wrote:
> yaxunl wrote:
> > can we emit an error if both -march and -mcpu are specified and the values
> > are different? This is a potential source of error.
> I'm not exactly sure about the semantics for this, maybe someone else can
> help. AFAIK `-mcpu` is sometimes treated as an alias of `-mtune` which is
> generally implied by `-march`. But having `-march` and `-mtune` state
> different things isn't technically disallowed. `-march` seems to imply that
> we generate code that can run on a certain architecture. Since these are in
> some respects equivalent it would probably be fine to just take the last one
> specified.
Some toolchains use -march to specify the target processor, some toolchains use
-mcpu to specify the target processor. For AMDGPU toolchain, it uses -mcpu to
specify the target processor in the beginning for OpenCL. Then we add HIP
support and let HIPAMD toolchain adopt using -mcpu to specify the target
processor. It is better to have a consistent way for specifying target
processor for AMDGPU toolchains.
HIPAMD toolchain does this by
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/HIPAMD.cpp#L275
.
Probably AMDGPUOpenMP toolchain can make a similar change? Then we have a
consistent way to specify target processor for AMDGPU toolchains.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133726/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D133726
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
