[llvm-dev] New llvm.commandline named metadata

[Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev]

> On Nov 13, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> 
> Overall, I think we should do this. It's one of the most popular out of tree extensions that people make to LLVM and clang, and we want it for codeview anyway.

Why isn't OPT_dwarf_debug_flags good enough for codeview?

-- adrian

> We currently don't emit a command line there. Other than that, I have some questions about how to do it.
> 
> How will you associate the command line with the compilation unit to deal with regular (fat, not thin) LTO? It looks like you don't:
>       assert(N->getNumOperands() == 1 &&
>              "llvm.commandline metadata entry can have only one operand");
> 
> IR linking will concatenate the named metadata nodes into a list of all the command lines. What should the semantics be? During regular object linking, I assume the command lines are discarded. Maybe just code that up?
> 
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 12:27 PM via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi llvm-dev,
> 
> I have an implementation of -frecord-gcc-switches ready for Clang, and a 
> named metadata node seemed like the correct way to approach this on the 
> LLVM side. I have a review at https://reviews.llvm.org/D54487 which 
> discusses some of the differences in implementation vs. GCC. A change to 
> the set of "special" named metadata nodes seems like something that 
> warrants an llvm-dev post, and I was not sure who specifically would be 
> interested in reviewing the changes.
> 
> Thanks,
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev