================
@@ -679,21 +679,17 @@ llvm::ARM::FPUKind arm::getARMTargetFeatures(const Driver
&D,
CPUArgFPUKind != llvm::ARM::FK_INVALID ? CPUArgFPUKind :
ArchArgFPUKind;
(void)llvm::ARM::getFPUFeatures(FPUKind, Features);
} else {
- bool Generic = true;
- if (!ForAS) {
- std::string CPU = arm::getARMTargetCPU(CPUName, ArchName, Triple);
- if (CPU != "generic")
- Generic = false;
- llvm::ARM::ArchKind ArchKind =
- arm::getLLVMArchKindForARM(CPU, ArchName, Triple);
- FPUKind = llvm::ARM::getDefaultFPU(CPU, ArchKind);
- (void)llvm::ARM::getFPUFeatures(FPUKind, Features);
- }
+ std::string CPU = arm::getARMTargetCPU(CPUName, ArchName, Triple);
+ bool Generic = CPU == "generic";
if (Generic && (Triple.isOSWindows() || Triple.isOSDarwin()) &&
getARMSubArchVersionNumber(Triple) >= 7) {
FPUKind = llvm::ARM::parseFPU("neon");
----------------
davemgreen wrote:
Is the isOSWindows || isOSDarwin if still needed and does it solve the issues
reported for darwin?
If the point of this code is to work around an upstream patch in ubuntu, I'm
wondering if that is better to address in the upstream ubuntu patch. Otherwise
we get into a tug of war between their patch and the one here, which doesn't
sound like the best solution. getARMCPUForArch already has some cpu overrides
for different OS's.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134612
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
