[PATCH] Update API to add PIC-level support.
jrh29 at alumni.cwru.edu
Thu Oct 9 22:54:37 PDT 2014
Do you mean add methods to llvm::Module class, as, say,
setPICLevel()/getPICLevel(), and set it from clang? If so, that's a
much less intrusive patch than this. I think I can get the Module
pointer when in the AsmPrinter, but what about in, say,
PPCTargetLowering? If I can always find the Module, then this will be
an easy change.
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:43:12 -0700
Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
> So the general comment here is that the pic level should be module
> dependent and merge according to whichever is "least pic-like". Can
> you make this a module level attribute that's looked up and merge that
> At which point I'm not sure whether or not the plumbing you've done
> here makes sense versus grabbing it otherwise.
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Eric Christopher
> <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'll look at this today.
> > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Justin Hibbits
> > <jrh29 at alumni.cwru.edu> wrote:
> >>>>! In D5332#9, @mcrosier wrote:
> >>> Just a few nits.
> >>> (If this isn't already being done in another patch) Can you add
> >>> some amount of functionality, so this can be tested in some
> >>> trivial way?
> >>> Unfortunately, I'm not the right person to sign off on this..
> >> Thanks for reviewing. This is just the plumbing patch. The real
> >> meat (the reason I created this in the first place) is in D5399,
> >> adding -fpic (small-model PIC) to PowerPC. This is accompanied by
> >> tests.
> >> This patch itself should have no impact on functionality, only on
> >> API usage, which D5400 demonstrates for Clang. So, really, D5400
> >> and this belong together, since Clang breaks without the patch in
> >> D5400.
> >> http://reviews.llvm.org/D5332
More information about the llvm-commits