kovdan01 wrote: > Given the complexity of the feature and lack of upstream runtime linker > (rtld) support, it might be wise to delay exposing it through driver options > until it's more mature. What do you think?
@MaskRay I suppose that if exposing this to driver options is considered undesirable at the moment, we can just add cc1 option. A cc1 option is actually needed to construct pauth-enabled environments - currently, it is done by adding a predefined set of `-fptrauth-*` flags, see `handlePAuthABI` function. If we only add cc1 flag and postpone adding driver flag, would it be OK? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96160 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
