================
@@ -198,13 +199,20 @@ static int PrintSupportedExtensions(std::string
TargetStr) {
std::unique_ptr<llvm::TargetMachine> TheTargetMachine(
TheTarget->createTargetMachine(TargetStr, "", "", Options,
std::nullopt));
const llvm::Triple &MachineTriple = TheTargetMachine->getTargetTriple();
+ const llvm::MCSubtargetInfo *MCInfo = TheTargetMachine->getMCSubtargetInfo();
----------------
cbalint13 wrote:
On my side on this topic I already checked this situation, yes looks protected
well.
@DavidSpickett
As sidenote here, on this topic opened by you:
* In case of ```createTargetMachine```, notice the -mcpu="" (second argument),
it will force to **return all target information**. If you specify i.e.
"sandybridge" than you can only access list of features and descriptions only
related to "sandybridge" subarchtecture / subset .
* I really hope LLVM will keep this (-mcpu="" => ALL) , and not cut it out
(some developer will think is a "safer" API), otherwise it will be impossible
to query LLVM features of **a whole target**.
LLVM looks (to humble me) very dynamic with frequent API changes, my point here
is a "utilitarian view" as external user I would like to take benefits and
features through API.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66715
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
