[lld] r193300 - [PassManager] add ReaderWriter{Native, YAML} to the Driver.

Reid Kleckner rnk at google.com
Thu Oct 24 13:39:47 PDT 2013


On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Shankar Easwaran
<shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote:

> On 10/24/2013 3:10 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>  There is a catch-22 here.  Without the new passes it is hard for anyone
>>> to
>>> fix the other problems in lld that were causing the test case failures.
>>>
>>> Can we do this in steps:
>>> 1) commit the code changes with the lines that use the two new passes
>>> commented out
>>> 2) owners of the broken areas can uncomment the code (enabling the
>>> passes)
>>> and fix their issues
>>> 3) the final commit is to enable the two new passes when all test cases
>>> pass
>>>
>>>  If folks want this, cool. I usually use a macro to enable/disable.
>>
>> That said, I think that Shankar should make a reasonable effort to fix the
>> other targets. I don't think its likely that hard. He hadn't even asked
>> for
>> help due to it being harder than expected when he landed this patch.
>>
> I am going to have the two lines as mentioned by Nick. The problem which I
> see is there are parts of code that are unimplemented, which needs to be
> fixed(which I have highlighted in my earlier mail).
>
> I would leave that to the owners of each flavor to handle in whichever
> form is needed as it requires thorough ABI understanding of how it
> runs(PECOFF/Darwin).
>
> To summarize I would like to have the owners of each flavor fix those
> areas.


Can you let each flavor opt in to the behavior, rather than breaking them?

It's also not clear to me that the code review finished.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20131024/45095955/attachment.html>


More information about the llvm-commits mailing list