awarzynski added a comment. In D128333#3613696 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128333#3613696>, @MaskRay wrote:
> True. If it is difficult to override the -pie default from flang side, I am > fine with the code change. Thanks! The proper/long-term fix will require extending Flang's frontend driver so that it supports `-mrelocation-model`, `-fpic` and `-fpic-level` (and probably a few more). But I don't want to rush that. >>> (Why does flang use clang/lib/Driver? For clang developers, it seems that >>> `check-clang check-clang-tools` is not sufficient. `check-flang` needs to >>> be used as well.) >> >> Otherwise, we'd have to re-implement clang/lib/Driver for LLVM Flang. This >> design was proposed and discussed here >> <https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2019-June/062669.html>. > > OK, so you did bring this up. I guess I'll have to accept... With clangDriver <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/be4b40d5bc6c1449090ff102e5f23254fd535cd4/clang/lib/Driver/CMakeLists.txt#L15-L96> being effectively shared between Clang and Flang, it would make a lot of sense to lift `clangDriver` out of Clang so that it's an independent sub-project. We've proposed that and folks have been mostly in favor. Relevant RFCs: - RFC: refactoring libclangDriver/libclangFrontend to share with Flang <https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-July/066393.html> - RFC: refactoring clangDriver - diagnostics classes <https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-November/067263.html> Not much is really happening in this area ATM, but I'm hoping that https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-improving-clang-s-diagnostics could unblock some progress. ================ Comment at: flang/test/Driver/no-pie.f90:3 + +!------------- +! RUN COMMANDS ---------------- MaskRay wrote: > The `! RUN COMMANDS` and `EXPECTED OUTPUT` comments seem rather redundant. > I'd remove them. This style is quite common in this directory, see e.g. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/flang/test/Driver/emit-asm-aarch64.f90. I'm hoping that this makes these tests easier to follow for folks less familiar with LIT in general. If that's OK, I'll leave this here (but I don't expect others to follow similar approach, IMO it's a matter of personal preference). ================ Comment at: flang/test/Driver/no-pie.f90:11 +!---------------- +! CHECK-NOT: fpie +! CHECK-NOT: fpic ---------------- MaskRay wrote: > This NOT pattern can easily get stale. You need a test that driver `-pie` > forwards `-pie` to the linker and by default `-pie` does not pass the the > linker. Good point, will update! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128333/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D128333 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
