compnerd accepted this revision.
compnerd added a reviewer: compnerd.
compnerd added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
That is a bug in the LLVM implementation. The functionality is supported on
other (i.e. `gcc`) compilers.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm
kparzysz added a comment.
Ping.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kparzysz updated the summary for this revision.
kparzysz updated this revision to Diff 68973.
kparzysz marked an inline comment as done.
kparzysz added a comment.
Changed the option description to be nont
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
Files:
include/clang/Driver/Optio
kparzysz marked an inline comment as done.
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Options.td:1380
@@ +1379,3 @@
+def mlong_calls : Flag<["-"], "mlong-calls">, Group,
+ HelpText<"ARM: Generate an indirect jump to enable jumps further than 64M,
Hexagon: Generate constant-extended branch
compnerd added a subscriber: compnerd.
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Options.td:1380
@@ +1379,3 @@
+def mlong_calls : Flag<["-"], "mlong-calls">, Group,
+ HelpText<"ARM: Generate an indirect jump to enable jumps further than 64M,
Hexagon: Generate constant-extended branches."
kparzysz added a comment.
Ping.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kparzysz updated this revision to Diff 68416.
kparzysz added a comment.
Moving mno_long_calls to m_Group as well.
I'm hoping this is all that's needed: what I understand as "custom handling" is
still needed, since this option is only valid for ARM and Hexagon. The Hexagon
way of handling targe
kparzysz added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766#505512, @echristo wrote:
> You haven't removed the custom handling?
The one from the driver? If I remove it, it won't be passed to the compiler
(and the testcase will fail).
I forgot to move the no-long-calls from the ARM group to
echristo added a comment.
You haven't removed the custom handling?
-eric
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kparzysz added a comment.
Ping?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kparzysz updated this revision to Diff 65919.
kparzysz marked 2 inline comments as done.
kparzysz added a comment.
Removed the cleanup part.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
Files:
include/clang/Driver/Options.td
lib/Basic/Targets.cpp
lib/Driver/Tools.cpp
test/Driv
echristo added a comment.
Go ahead and split out your cleanups into another patch and remove the custom
handling in the hexagon target then.
Thanks!
-eric
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22766
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-com
kparzysz added a comment.
It likely is sufficient. The code in Targets.cpp adds checking for
"long-calls" feature in hasFeature, but it's not explicitly used anywhere. The
rest of the changes are mostly to clean up the handling of feature strings.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.
echristo added a comment.
Why isn't the existing +long-calls handling good enough (other than making it a
generic option rather than arm specific)? You don't seem to be using any of the
code in Targets.cpp to do anything.
Also a couple of random comments inline on the patch.
-eric
==
kparzysz created this revision.
kparzysz added reviewers: t.p.northover, echristo.
kparzysz added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
kparzysz set the repository for this revision to rL LLVM.
Herald added subscribers: mehdi_amini, aemerson.
Make -mlong-calls a general (i.e. non ARM-specific) option.
Repos
15 matches
Mail list logo
