[PATCH] D137753: [Clang][GNU][AIX][p]Enable -p Functionality

[Fangrui Song via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MaskRay added a comment.

In D137753#3935305 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935305>, @francii wrote:

> Recall that the goal with `-p` is to create parity with GCC (at least with Linux and AIX), as per the RFC discussion.
>
> In D137753#3935138 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935138>, @MaskRay wrote:
>
>> In D137753#3935126 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935126>, @francii wrote:
>>
>>> In D137753#3934932 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3934932>, @MaskRay wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please make `-p` accepted for AIX only and don't change the semantics for other targets in this patch. For FreeBSD and Linux (musl and gnu) we can try rejecting `-p`. If OpenBSD wants to make `-p` an alias for `-pg`, that's fine.
>>>
>>> We can make `-p` emit a message on Linux while also accepting it as an alias to `-pg`. Do you have a suggestion as to what that message would be?
>>
>> The current `warning: argument unused during compilation: '-p' [-Wunused-command-line-argument]` is good for Linux.
>> In the future Linux can try removing `-p`.
>
> The current behaviour of ignoring the option without stopping with an error return code is not a good one.
>
> Recall that the goal is to create parity with GCC, as per the RFC post.
>
> Is there a reason this flag shouldn't be supported on Linux? Specifically, what is your justification for diverging from GCC on this matter?

It's a legacy option and we don't want the usage to grow. I objected in the RFC, either. Note that the objection is not only from me, also from a Linux distro folk I checked with.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753