jhuber6 wrote: > I feel choosing toolchain based on input files does not solve all the use > cases. > > You may want to handle the object files, bitcodes, or assembly files > differently by using different toolchains, e.g. you may want to choose rocm > toolchain or amdgpu toolchain or HIPAMD toolchain to hand the object file, > even though it has the same extension. Although you could introduce -x for > different object type, e.g. cl_obj, cxx_obj, or hip_obj, but that is quite > cubbersome. > > I am wondering whether we should introduce a clang option which allows us to > directly choose a toolchain.
I think the main difference here is in the compile phase, which wants to load the ROCm libraries. They're probably identical after that point since the only differences exist inside the `addClangTargetOptions`, so after `clang` it should be just feeding it through the pipeline / ld.lld. It's an inconvenience for me that targeting C++ is held hostage by OpenCL so if I ever do `--target=amdgcn-amd-amdhsa` I get errors about not finding the ROCm libraries even though we shouldn't use them by default here. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99687 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
