dblaikie added a comment. In D137058#4055275 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058#4055275>, @ChuanqiXu wrote:
> In D137058#4050188 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058#4050188>, @dblaikie > wrote: > >> I really don't think this is the right thing to do - the Split DWARF code, >> for instance, has support for GPU bundling that's missing in the module file >> naming code, which seems likely to be broken & within reason handle-able >> today by reusing the Split DWARF code, similarly with the multi-arch >> bundling for MachO. But I've tried to explain these things in several ways, >> and haven't managed to connect. >> >> Carry on. > > Thanks for your patient reviewing! We can merge the logics with Split DWARF > code someday when we find it necessary. My concern is that when it becomes necessary it won't be apparent - someone will fix (or introduce) a bug in one codepath, unaware of the other similar codepath. Unifying them before that happens is valuable. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
