asavonic wrote: @mysterymath, @ilovepi, @efriedma-quic, thank you for review!
> Generally, I'd like to minimize the amount of code for LTO that's in clang/: > we have other frontends that do LTO, and we don't want them to > copy-paste/translate a bunch of new code just to make inline asm work the way > it's supposed to. Can we refactor this? Sure! Perhaps we can move `ModuleSymbolTable::CollectAsm*` calls and metadata construction to `ModuleSymbolTable` itself? Then Clang or other frontends can call `ModuleSymbolTable` to get a constructed metadata, and set it as a flag. Or let `ModuleSymbolTable` to update a Module. > Can you add a RISC-V test? We've had lots of problem w/ target features in > LTO w/ RV, and the module level inline asm in particular. To date we've done > a few things to try and mitigate that by plumbing them through the backend. > I'd like to know how this patch ends up interacting w/ that, and whether this > solve some of the remaining issues, or if we need further triage for that > backend. > > #50591, #65090, #69780 are all related to some extent. Yes, I'm going to add a test from #67698 for RISC-V, and check other issues that you mentioned. Not all of them are minimal, so I may need some help there. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/174995 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
