https://github.com/topperc approved this pull request.
LGTM
Related question. If there is an -mcpu on the command line and target attribute
changes the march, do we keep the original CPU in the -target-cpu attribute or
drop it. The reason for all those negative features from the driver was to
https://github.com/BeMg approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74889
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
BeMg wrote:
> LGTM
>
> Related question. If there is an -mcpu on the command line and target
> attribute changes the march, do we keep the original CPU in the -target-cpu
> attribute or drop it. The reason for all those negative features from the
> driver was to make the backend not infer any
topperc wrote:
> > LGTM
>
> >
>
> > Related question. If there is an -mcpu on the command line and target
> > attribute changes the march, do we keep the original CPU in the -target-cpu
> > attribute or drop it. The reason for all those negative features from the
> > driver was to make the
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74889
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
preames wrote:
> Related question. If there is an -mcpu on the command line and target
> attribute changes the march, do we keep the original CPU in the -target-cpu
> attribute or drop it. The reason for all those negative features from the
> driver was to make the backend not infer any featur
https://github.com/preames closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74889
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/preames created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74889
d80e46d added support for the target function attribute. However, it turns out
that commit has a nasty bug/oversight. As the tests in that revision show,
everything works if clang -cc1 is directly invoked. I
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Philip Reames (preames)
Changes
d80e46d added support for the target function attribute. However, it turns out
that commit has a nasty bug/oversight. As the tests in that revision show,
everything works if clang -cc1 is directly invoked
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff 05420a17547e495f5748e9662150d6eb931e2c28
65707b837a8bb7283896d2c9d4933a17e02a20b9 --
10 matches
Mail list logo