MaskRay added a comment. In D129824#3794229 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129824#3794229>, @jrtc27 wrote:
> In D129824#3794221 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129824#3794221>, @MaskRay wrote: > >> Both D54214 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D54214> and this look like a >> surprising behavior to me. Do we still have time to go back the state before >> D54214 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D54214> and make mismatching --target & >> -march= an error? > > Then there's no -m32 equivalent; that's what -march currently gives you... > also GCC lets you do it. And -target is Clang-specific so you can't write > something that works for both compilers. We can accept `-m32/-m64` as a special case. Other `-m` options (I edited my previous comment and added a confusing `--target=riscv64 -march=rv64i -m32` case when you made the comment.) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D129824/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D129824 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
