ted added a comment. In D155117#4521393 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155117#4521393>, @labath wrote:
> In D155117#4510512 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155117#4510512>, @ted wrote: > >> In D155117#4505538 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155117#4505538>, @labath wrote: >> >>> I am wondering if we actually need the second step (the architecture >>> setting) here. The main reason it exists is the usage in >>> `GetSupportedArchitectures` (which is called before a target is created) it >>> seems like the value derived from the target should always be more correct. >>> WDYT? What are the values you get in steps 2 and 3 for your use case? >> >> I don't think we need to specify the architecture, because I think we can >> always get it from the triple. There might be a case where someone is using >> a qemu that isn't named the same as the Triple ArchName, but that case could >> be covered by emulator-path. > > Yeah, that's my thinking as well. Given this, I think we should drop the > setting part and just go with the target value directly. Do you want me to remove the setting entirely? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D155117/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D155117 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
