mstorsjo added a comment. In D69031#1714143 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69031#1714143>, @labath wrote:
> In D69031#1714107 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69031#1714107>, @mstorsjo wrote: > > > In D69031#1713900 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69031#1713900>, @aprantl wrote: > > > > > Check out `lldb/test/Shell/helper/toolchain.py`, you probably need to > > > filter out some options for clang_cl specifically. > > > > > > Yeah, I later found that. The issue is that it's passed to usr_clang in i > > llvm/utils/lit/lit/llvm/config.py, which sets all the provided additional > > flags on both %clang, %clangxx, %clang_cc1 and %clang_cl. > > > > Maybe the additional_flags param needs to be split, into one common for > > all, one for gcc-style driver, one for clang_cl, and maybe also a separate > > one for cc1 (where not all driver level flags may fit either)? > > > Actually, it seems to be that these arguments should not be added to the > command line by default. All of the existing tests that do "%clang -target > whatever" don't need the arguments, and they "only" work because the > arguments do no harm because the tests don't do anything which would depend > on them. I think we should leave `additional_flags` argument mostly empty, > and instead have a separate way of invoking clang when building for the host. > Either %clang_host (achievable with a recursive substitution %clang_host -> > %clang <whatever>), or using something like %clang %host_cflags. > > I can have a stab at that, if you like, but I'm not sure I'll get around to > that before the llvm conference is over... Do you have time to look into this now? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69031/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69031 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
