[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-11 Thread Dan Gohman via Phabricator via cfe-commits
This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGf9c05fc39145: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present. (authored by sunfish). Changed prior to commit:

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-11 Thread Sam Clegg via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sbc100 accepted this revision. sbc100 added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Ok so we can see this as an interm thing. I think I'm OK with that. Could you add a comment about that, or at least say why we want to support both the old crt1 and the new crt1-command at

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-10 Thread Dan Gohman via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sunfish added a comment. I don't see a way to do this with weak symbols, and an install script would be yet-another moving part that we'd have to make on end-user systems. How about this: once we reach a point where we don't support the old LLVM anymore, libc can make crt1.o be the same as

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-10 Thread Sam Clegg via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sbc100 added a comment. In D89274#211 , @sunfish wrote: > It's to ensure that older LLVM works with newer WASI libc, and newer clang > works with older WASI libc. New-style commands require [lld support]. We can > assume that if clang is updated,

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-10 Thread Dan Gohman via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sunfish added a comment. It's to ensure that older LLVM works with newer WASI libc, and newer clang works with older WASI libc. New-style commands require [lld support]. We can assume that if clang is updated, lld has the requisite support. That said, I'm open to other ideas here. [lld

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-10 Thread Sam Clegg via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sbc100 added a comment. Why not just use crt1.o in both cases?If you are going to prefer crt1-command.o in all cases then a toolchain would have no reason to ever ship crt1.o would it? (since it would always be ignored?) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2021-02-10 Thread Dan Gohman via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sunfish added a comment. Ping! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D89274/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D89274 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D89274: [WebAssembly] Use the new crt1-command.o if present.

2020-10-12 Thread Dan Gohman via Phabricator via cfe-commits
sunfish created this revision. sunfish added a reviewer: sbc100. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, ecnelises, jgravelle-google, dschuff. Herald added a project: clang. sunfish requested review of this revision. Herald added a subscriber: aheejin. If crt1-command.o exists in the sysroot, the