erichkeane added a subscriber: ChuanqiXu. erichkeane added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/Type.h:3940 + /// on declarations and function pointers. + unsigned AArch64SMEAttributes : 8; + ---------------- sdesmalen wrote: > erichkeane wrote: > > sdesmalen wrote: > > > erichkeane wrote: > > > > sdesmalen wrote: > > > > > erichkeane wrote: > > > > > > We seem to be missing all of the modules-storage code for these. > > > > > > Since this is modifying the AST, we need to increment the 'breaking > > > > > > change' AST code, plus add this to the ASTWriter/ASTReader > > > > > > interface. > > > > > > Since this is modifying the AST, we need to increment the 'breaking > > > > > > change' AST code > > > > > Could you give me some pointers on what you expect to see changed > > > > > here? I understand your point about adding this to the > > > > > ASTWriter/Reader interfaces for module-storage, but it's not entirely > > > > > clear what you mean by "increment the breaking change AST code". > > > > > > > > > > I see there is also an ASTImporter, I guess this different from the > > > > > ASTReader? > > > > > > > > > > Please apologise my ignorance here, I'm not as familiar with the > > > > > Clang codebase. > > > > See VersionMajor here: > > > > https://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/ASTBitCodes_8h_source.html > > > > > > > > Yes, ASTReader/ASTWriter and ASTImporter are different unfortunately. > > > > I'm not completely sure of the difference, but doing this patch > > > > changing the type here without doing those will break modules. > > > So I tried to create some tests for this (see > > > clang/test/AST/ast-dump-sme-attributes.cpp) and realised that the > > > serialization/deserialization works out-of-the-box. > > > > > > Does that mean all is needed is an increment of the VERSION_MAJOR or > > > VERSION_MINOR number? > > So its not just ast-dump that matters, it is what happens when these > > functions are exported from a module, and imported from another? Unless > > you make changes to those areas, this SME stuff will be lost, since you're > > making it part of the type. > Hi @erichkeane I've added a test for module export/import and was surprised > to see this work without any additional changes. Do you think the added test > is correct/sufficient to show that this works? I don't have a good idea of that, I know little about our modules implementation. Perhaps @ChuanqiXu knows? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D127762/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D127762 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
