[PATCH] D137059: [Driver] [Modules] Introduce -fsave-std-c++-module-file= to specify the path of the module file (2/2)

[Ben Boeckel via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ben.boeckel added a comment.

There is another motivating factor for 1-phase: the build graph is far simpler. With 2-phase, CMake will have to write out rules to perform:

- source -> .bmi
- .bmi -> .withbmi.o
- source -> .o

because we do not know if a BMI is needed or not. If it isn't we use the latter. If it is, we use the former. Note that this also means we need 2 different `.o` filenames (as neither `make` nor `ninja` doesn't support multiple rules making the same output). This also means that the collator needs to generate a response file for the linker to direct which `.o` file to use for each TU based on the contents.

Also with 2-phase, it is an open question of whether it actually helps with distributed builds (or anywhere process execution and I/O are expensive compared to some minimal work unit such as, say, Windows compiling from a network drive). Since this is not a bright line, giving the option to say "I know that split BMI is better for me in this instance" and "please combine here" would be handy (depending on actual real-world perf results on real-world projects). Yes, this is a chicken-and-egg cycle :) .


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D137059/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D137059