[PATCH] D77231: [lld] Support -emit-asm with LTO

[Hongtao Yu via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

hoyFB marked an inline comment as done.
hoyFB added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lld/ELF/Driver.cpp:890
   config->emitLLVM = args.hasArg(OPT_plugin_opt_emit_llvm, false);
+  config->emitAsm = args.hasArg(OPT_lto_emit_asm, false);
   config->emitRelocs = args.hasArg(OPT_emit_relocs);
----------------
hoyFB wrote:
> grimar wrote:
> > It looks inconsistent with another `OPT_lto*` options we have:
> > 
> > ```
> >   config->ltoAAPipeline = args.getLastArgValue(OPT_lto_aa_pipeline);
> >   config->ltoCSProfileGenerate = args.hasArg(OPT_lto_cs_profile_generate);
> >   config->ltoCSProfileFile = args.getLastArgValue(OPT_lto_cs_profile_file);
> > ...
> > ```
> > 
> > Should it be called `config->ltoEmitAsm` to be consistent?
> > 
> > Or, instead, it could be `args.hasArg(OPT_plugin_opt_emit_asm, false)`, what also would make sense it seems.
> > 
> > What do other reviewers think?
> Naming it ```config->ltoEmitAsm``` sounds good to me. If you look at the relationship between ```OPT_lto*``` and ```OPT_plugin_opt_*``` in lld, the later is always an alias of the former.
Well, on the second thought, I'm thinking maybe just removing the `--lto-emit-asm` switch and only having `--plugin-opt=emit-asm`, since it is not lld-exclusive. What do you think?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D77231/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D77231