[all-commits] [llvm/llvm-project] 549a1e: Renovate CMake files in the `llvm-exegesis` tool.

[Jameson Nash via All-commits]

  Branch: refs/heads/main
  Home:   https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
  Commit: 549a1e2e59508d4aeaf9a93912b479798954bd5e
      https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/549a1e2e59508d4aeaf9a93912b479798954bd5e
  Author: Jameson Nash <vtjnash at gmail.com>
  Date:   2021-02-08 (Mon, 08 Feb 2021)

  Changed paths:
    M llvm/tools/llvm-exegesis/CMakeLists.txt
    M llvm/tools/llvm-exegesis/lib/AArch64/CMakeLists.txt
    M llvm/tools/llvm-exegesis/lib/CMakeLists.txt
    M llvm/tools/llvm-exegesis/lib/Mips/CMakeLists.txt
    M llvm/tools/llvm-exegesis/lib/PowerPC/CMakeLists.txt
    M llvm/tools/llvm-exegesis/lib/X86/CMakeLists.txt
    M llvm/utils/TableGen/GlobalISel/CMakeLists.txt

  Log Message:
  -----------
  Renovate CMake files in the `llvm-exegesis` tool.

This attempts to move all tools over to using `add_llvm_library` for
better consistency. After doing this, I noticed it ended up as nearly a
reimplementation of https://reviews.llvm.org/rL342148, which later got
reverted in r342336 (b09a8c9bd9b819741b38071a7ccd95042ef2643a).

With ccache and ninja on a large core machine (40), I haven't run into
build errors, so I'm hopeful it's better now, though it doesn't seem to
be any different / new.

Reviewed By: stephenneuendorffer

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90970


  Commit: 16e7973c5d8fb543ea9e91735be8610a8b1c262a
      https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/16e7973c5d8fb543ea9e91735be8610a8b1c262a
  Author: Jameson Nash <vtjnash at gmail.com>
  Date:   2021-02-08 (Mon, 08 Feb 2021)

  Changed paths:
    M llvm/tools/llvm-cfi-verify/lib/CMakeLists.txt

  Log Message:
  -----------
  Renovate CMake file for the `llvm-cfi-verify` tool

Hopefully this is the non-problematic part from https://reviews.llvm.org/rL342148, which later got reverted in r342336 (b09a8c9bd9b819741b38071a7ccd95042ef2643a) due to problems with the llvm-exegesis part of the change. That part would also still be desirable, but currently appears not to be possible (https://reviews.llvm.org/D81922).

I think this should replace https://reviews.llvm.org/D44650, per Keno's comment there.

Reviewed By: hctim

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90969


Compare: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/compare/a5b07a221a57...16e7973c5d8f