qcolombet added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:4699
+ else
+ CmdArgs.push_back("-global-isel=0");
+ }
----------------
aemerson wrote:
> qcolombet wrote:
> > qcolombet wrote:
> > > I think that it would be useful to also set -global-isel-abort=2, so that
> > > users can report problem early.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > >
> > Should we have some kind of "target validation"?
> > What I'd like to avoid is people trying the new allocator on unsupported
> > target (as in the GISel base classes are not present) that would just crash
> > the compiler.
> >
> > Alternatively, we could fix the backend to fallback gracefully/abort
> > properly in those situation.
> > Right now I believe we would get a segfault on RegisterBankInfo or
> > something along those lines.
> > I think that it would be useful to also set -global-isel-abort=2, so that
> > users can report problem early.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> Yes that makes sense, although should we ignore it for ARM64 O0 since we will
> officially support it?
>
> >
> > Should we have some kind of "target validation"?
> > What I'd like to avoid is people trying the new allocator on unsupported
> > target (as in the GISel base classes are not present) that would just crash
> > the compiler.
>
> Perhaps a warning like "GlobalISel support is incomplete for [target]"? I
> don't know the GISel status for other targets.
>
>
> Yes that makes sense, although should we ignore it for ARM64 O0 since we will
> officially support it?
Sounds sensible. We can advertise the remark option if people want to know what
is going on.
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42276
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
