reames added a comment. In D136106#3863202 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D136106#3863202>, @reames wrote:
> In D136106#3863147 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D136106#3863147>, @craig.topper > wrote: > >>> In the original review, I'd mentioned that MinVLEN was sometimes zero. >>> That's still true, but apparently only happens if you specify multiple >>> extensions in the -target_feature string. So, we can at least test "v" and >>> "zve64x" on their own before I go figure out exactly what's going wrong >>> regarding e.g. parsing "+v,+zvl512b". >> >> I think you need to use `-target-feature "v" -target-feature "zvl512b". > > So, this was part right. The other issue is I'd been using Zvl512b, and > apparently this bit of parsing code is case sensitive. I'm going to look > into improving the error reporting here. Replying back to myself here as I'm not quite sure where to put this... So, it turns out target-feature is currently quite weird. At the *clang* level, we require individual target-feature options for each extensions. Using a compound "+v,+zvl512b" is not recognized by the clang code (i.e, the bit this patch was modifying). However, this raw string gets joined with the valid attributes, and set into the IR as "target-features"="+64bit,+v,+zvl512b" on the function. This string is then parsed by later consumers, and thus the extensions listed in the compound list *are* picked up during e.g. codegen. So, it turns out we both do, and don't, parse these compound target-feature strings. I'm leaning in the direction of having clang just support the compound target-feature strings, but I haven't found the right place for that just yet. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D136106/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D136106 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
