[PATCH] D41693: [ARM][NFC] Avoid recreating MCSubtargetInfo in ARMAsmBackend

[Eric Christopher via llvm-commits]

It should be testable at some point, but I'm not terribly worried about it
as a prerequisite.

-eric

On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 8:06 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> [+echristo who did the per-function-subtarget work & might have some
> suggestions on how this might be tested/testable or not]
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 6:15 AM Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote:
>
>> On 8 January 2018 at 17:10, David Blaikie via llvm-commits
>> <llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> > No test coverage?
>> >
>> > I'm assuming creating the MCSubtargetInfo with the function's feature
>> string
>> > (rather than an empty string) would fix bugs where function-specific
>> feature
>> > strings were not respected? Perhaps an example of that could be tested?
>>
>> That could make sense. The change is motivated primarily by code
>> cleanup rather than addressing any known bug. I would think observable
>> differences in behaviour could be observed in tests like
>> t2-modified-immediate-fixup-error{1,2}.s, but I can't see an
>> appropriate baseline -march to use.  Suggestions from those of you
>> more familiar with the Arm product line would be welcome. Any ideas
>> anyone?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180109/3af500fd/attachment.html>