[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

uweigand added a comment. In D82862#2513044 , @rnk wrote: > In D82862#2512908 , @uweigand wrote: > >> So why do you want GNU inline asm for clang-cl anyway? I thought the whole >> point of clang-cl was to be comp

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

anirudhp added a comment. In D82862#2513044 , @rnk wrote: > In D82862#2512908 , @uweigand wrote: > >> So why do you want GNU inline asm for clang-cl anyway? I thought the whole >> point of clang-cl was to be comp

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

rnk added a comment. In D82862#2512908 , @uweigand wrote: > So why do you want GNU inline asm for clang-cl anyway? I thought the whole > point of clang-cl was to be compatible with the Microsoft Visual Studio > compiler, which I understand only support

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

uweigand added a comment. In D82862#2500717 , @hans wrote: >> In D82862#2498785 , @hans wrote: >> >>> The motivation for my change was really just to make ThinLTO compiles work >>> the same as non-ThinLTO ones. >>>

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

hans added a subscriber: rnk. hans added a comment. > In D82862#2498785 , @hans wrote: > >> The motivation for my change was really just to make ThinLTO compiles work >> the same as non-ThinLTO ones. >> >> Maybe the fact that -x86-asm-syntax=intel doesn't

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

uweigand added a comment. In D82862#2500038 , @pengfei wrote: >> What is the reason for treating this differently in LLVM? > > I'm not sure if it is related to this. I think one difference is that LLVM is > supporting MS inline assembly. Although it uses

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

pengfei added a comment. > What is the reason for treating this differently in LLVM? I'm not sure if it is related to this. I think one difference is that LLVM is supporting MS inline assembly. Although it uses Intel dialect, it has different representation in input, output, clobber etc. with G

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

hans added a comment. In D82862#2498242 , @uweigand wrote: > Hi @hans , we're having some issues with using the AssemblerDialect mechanism > to support both the GNU assembler and the IBM HLASM assembler in the SystemZ > back-end. See also the discuss

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

uweigand added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: pengfei. Hi @hans , we're having some issues with using the AssemblerDialect mechanism to support both the GNU assembler and the IBM HLASM assembler in the SystemZ back-end. See also the discussion started here: https://lists.llvm.org/pip

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGa8e582c8307b: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect (PR46503) (authored by hans). Herald added a project: clang. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

hans created this revision. hans added a reviewer: pcc. Herald added subscribers: llvm-commits, dexonsmith, steven_wu, hiraditya, inglorion. Herald added a project: LLVM. clang-cl passes -x86-asm-syntax=intel to the cc1 invocation so that assembly listings produced by the /FA flag are printed in