ilinpv added a comment.
In D127812#3585249 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D127812#3585249>, @erichkeane
wrote:
> I'm concerned as to the design of this addition, I don't particularly
> appreciate the reasons for making 'target_clones' different, nor the purpose
> for adding a new attribute instead of using 'target' for what seems like
> exactly that? IF the new spelling is THAT necessary, we perhaps don't need a
> whole new attribute for it either.
Thank you for fair concern, "target_clones" for AArch64 has different format,
semantic, e.g. "default" is not required. Therefore it diverges with X86 in
these parts. "target" attribute has been already used and supported on AArch64
in a different sense, like target("arm"), target("dotprod"),
target("branch-protection=bti"). The intention of creating new "target_version"
attribute is not to overlap with that. It also has different format, mangling
and semantic, e.g. treating function without attribute as "default", and option
to disable attribute droping function multi versions.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D127812/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D127812
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
